Is something going on at The Guardian?

[Doobigetta]

Four articles in the last few days:

• Praising Obama for denouncing cancel culture- and we all know he said “verbs” but he meant “pronouns”. The article says “you can make people change the words they use, but you can’t make them change what they think”.
• One about a support group in Australia for women whose husbands come out as gay in later life, highlighting the particular unfairness of having to watch your husband being praised for his bravery in ripping your life out from under you. No mention of trans widows but the parallel is very obvious.
• A review of “Who are you calling fat” asks “what are the limits on matters of self-identification? Where do we end up if there are no such things as facts?”
• And then finally Catherine Bennett in her column about the abuse of MPs specifically included the treatment of TERFs as evidence of misogyny in public debate.

This seems quite a shift from a year ago, when only Hadley Freeman even came close to voicing GC thoughts. Is the tide turning?

About time if they are changing tack but I shall never, ever read this rag again.

Hinsliff's Cologne article is shocking.

We should feel sorry about these poor men from previously oppressive regimes who were at the bottom of the "food chain" there (really? the bottom? I think you'll find women at the bottom of the food chain in those places) and they were celebrating that at least in Germany they could, through violence and sexual attacks, put women at the bottom for once?

Excuse me?

What?

What?????

actually, I blame (in part) the Guardian and general woke-ism for my personal political shift tot he right (no, don't worry, not scary right-right, just no longer a "liberal")

They published several articles sympathetic to TWs who had been put in male prisons, with the nature of their crimes conveniently glossed over.

They were also particularly woke on the subject of child asylum seekers at least some of whom were no such thing. Again, calling people racist bigots for believing the evidence of their own eyes regarding what is an adult male. It is not racism or bigotry to want scarce UK foster places for children to go to actual children or ensure adult males stay out of classrooms with actual children - both of which subsequently happened and were, exactly as with the trans issue, the result of prioritising ideology above actual children's wellbeing.

Perhaps they are seeing that they need to moderate their editorial line.

But what's bothered me with them, and a few other sources, is not really that they have published things I disagreed with, it's that the coverage has been so one sided. I expect a good paper, whatever its bias, to stick to certain journalistic standards in terms of presenting facts, getting viewpoints, coverage of stories, and also to have some breadth of coverage, so there will be articles that disagree within the paper on questions where there really are multiple viewpoints.

If a paper does that, I will read them even if all the articles disagree with my perspective, because there is some level of trust i their process.

The comments like someone said above have signalled the issue for a while. I didn't notice it first though with GC issues, I noticed it particularly with Laura bates columns and a few others. You would often have some really critical comments under those regarding her statistical claims and process, that were absolutely reasonable questions or criticisms of her articles, and they were pretty much universally moderated out quite quickly. They ended up publishing an article from the editorial staff asking for input on how to deal with the negative comments on these kinds of articles and many regular posters said, you need to let these comments stand or better yet, tighten up how you edit these opinion pieces in terms of factual and especially statistical claims, just find better writers.

The response of the Guardian - stop putting comment sections under the articles that people were responding to so negatively.

That said it all to me.

@TheHumansAreDefinitelyDead

actually, I blame (in part) the Guardian and general woke-ism for my personal political shift tot he right (no, don't worry, not scary right-right, just no longer a "liberal")

I feel similarly. I've always been quite liberal but I'm not ready to drink the kool-aid.

On the Cologne article, I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure it was eventually reported (not in the Graun) that the attackers were not, in fact, recent immigrants but members of the established muslim population.

Not that the Guardian cares. Muslims are muslims are muslims, one great homogenous mass, to them.

but I'm pretty sure it was eventually reported (not in the Graun) that the attackers were not, in fact, recent immigrants but members of the established muslim population

Only about 1 in 20 of the estimated 2000 men involved in the attacks across Germany (it wasn't just Cologne) were identified but, of those, 50% had been in Germany less than a year. IDK how many were refugees.

One of the many grotesque aspects of the Guardian's coverage is the way that it lumps all non-European men together when, in fact, there are some Middle Eastern/ African countries where this sort of mass harassment of women in public is sadly common (Egypt, Morocco) and others where is most definitely isn't (Ghana, Iran). Hinsliff's take on the attacks - "we must make allowances because they are non-European" is every bit as racist as Alternative für Deutschland's, because it assumes that the attackers' behaviour is somehow inevitable and unamendable.

Fair enough XXcstatic I only have a hazy memory of later details emerging.

I absolutely agree with you about failure to note nuance though.

Even within the UK the Guardian treats muslim people as if they are all the same, all of the same culture, rather than a varied group with differing beliefs and cultural values.

Hinsliff's take on the attacks - "we must make allowances because they are non-European" is every bit as racist as Alternative für Deutschland's, because it assumes that the attackers' behaviour is somehow inevitable and unamendable.

That's a very good point. It's actually saying, "We can't expect these people to abide by normal standards of decent behaviour, because of the culture they come from."

Absolutely.

Well there's your basic issue with cultural relativism innit?

The response of the Guardian - stop putting comment sections under the articles that people were responding to so negatively

Yes, I've been noticing that recently. Anything which represents an unwelcome or unfashionable view, or set of findings - will not be open for comments. such as the Sarah Ditum piece in this weekend's Observer.

Here is the Guardian' giving PL a platform to tell women that our fears are all in our minds. One of many similar articles, with opposing view given little or no coverage.

Well there's your basic issue with cultural relativism innit?

The same sort of arguments that say that the niqab when worn on British streets is just an article of clothing: the wearer's choice.....rather than an affront to the values that women have long fought for in Britain/the West.

I grew up in a Guardian-reading home and, once I went to university, bought it myself every day for over 40 years. By the end (a couple of years ago) I became quite worried that I was becoming a rightwing, racist bigot because I disagreed with so much of its content and actually found far more sense in the btl comments. Since I stopped reading it, and particularly since I joined MN, I've far better understood that it was the Guardian that had changed rather than me. It has completely lost my trust now.

There's an election on?

They published several articles sympathetic to TWs who had been put in male prisons, with the nature of their crimes conveniently glossed over.

Helen Pidd's article on Lauren Jeska was a particularly egregious example. A man was left with life changing injuries and disabilities for nothing more than being a volunteer for a sports assocation:

www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/17/jailed-transgender-fell-runner-thought-uk-athletics-was-trying-to-kill-her

Not that you'd know it from this pile of shit.

There was this awful story the Observer did on the transgender prisoner Marie Dean:

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/27/marie-dean-trans-prisoner-male-prison-hunger-strike

The original piece didn't even mention what Dean's crimes were - the article was amended after people complained on Twitter to include the sentence: "Her crimes included breaking into several homes and filming herself wearing underwear belonging to teenage girls."

Anything which represents an unwelcome or unfashionable view, or set of findings - will not be open for comments.

Truth be known the Guardian have had a problem with its readers daring to disagree for a long time.

Anyone remember the Max Gogarty incident? Sure, there were some awful comments, but an awful lot more saying hearing about well off young people's gap years was pretty passe or calling out the Guardian's nepotism. They ended up having senior staffers berating the awful, bullying readers, rather than removing the actual bullying (there was some) and taking legitimate criticism on the chin.

I don't think they were overly chuffed the time they invited the Barefoot Doctor to their now defunct talkboards and everyone took the piss either.

Good god, that Jeska piece is awful. Victim blaming tosh from paper and parents alike.

Arnold - Helen Pidd is also the one who (admirably) took in a Syrian refugee but then (not admirably) wrote about him as if he were some kind of pet.

www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/09/my-syrian-refugee-lodger-helen-pidd

I don't think Hinsliff was quite saying that the attacks were the fault of women for having smartphones

She was implying that the women were privileged. There is no other reason to mention it at all. Which is highly speculative, entirely inappropriate, callous and irrelevant.

Anyone remember the Max Gogarty incident?

Yes. They set him up for that. Are they so out of touch that they didn't realise what was inevitably going to happen?

They also employ Paris Lees, who has a somewhat colorful past...