Ever wondered what happened to The Guardian?

[WarriorN]

Interesting thread.

The more I've read and heard, the more I've realised how much what we are dealing with has come from the US.

Via universities social media, Reddit, tumblr, YouTube, and it seems also via the Guardian.

Also obviously via their health care system which is private and so insurance based and more focussed on 💵, follow the money etc. WPATH were the supposed lead on trans health care; they're a self appointed bunch. Not a true professional body.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436253950236405782.html?fbclid=IwAR141z3t92yV8Bq9uE1fyV05lpmhfMBhhfRR5qXniFE5DeZ-Cl-X6yW_Zx4

Great piece. The Guardian's business model is, ironically, exactly the sort of thing Lefties of my generation took to the streets to campaign against in the big anti-capitalist, anti-globalisation demos 20 years ago: big companies using their muscle and reach to undercut the competition and drive it out of business, the silencing of diverse alternative voices, importing and imposing the economic and cultural, Wild West values of the USA on countries with a very different social and cultural history, a US Fox News model of shouty polemicists rather than honest facts. And when, in future years, we start to unpick this mess, I think the North American big pharma and surgery industries will be found as a driving force at the heart of it.

Yes; great post by you to Ivy.

It's scary how quickly the digital age has driven this stuff.

*too

A few years agonthey were running huge articles on companies avoiding paying tax whilst doing exactly the same thing. Total hypocrisy.

Someone needs to call an open meeting for any journalists to start a new paper based outside London that will cover national issues fairly and critically from a centre-left non-metropolitan perspective.

Provisional title for the new title, The Manchester Guardian.

Ever wondered what happened to The Guardian?

Katharine Viner

I'm surprised by his observation that, globally, all young journalists want to work for the Guardian. If that's the case, why are the only decent journalists (Marina Hyde, John Crace) they have left the ones who write about UK politics? Where are all these global superstars?

As they have a trust fund they draw from (ironically enough) and get funding from George Soros they can publish what interests them, not their readers.

Look at their circulation figures:

2010: 302,285
2019: 141,160 and
2021: 105,134.

Article and analysis by STILLTish published 15th Jul 2019:

'Why are the Guardian suddenly so woeful on women’s rights?'
(extract)
"Why is the Guardian so woeful on Women’s Rights these days when, arguably, we are facing the biggest attack on our sex based rights in my lifetime? Coverage of Marie Dean was a low point... For the purposes of this article suffice to say it was campaign journalism to facilitate a move of a prisoner to the female estate. What the Guardian did, until shamed by angry readers, was to de-sexualise the nature of the “burglary” and, in effect, disregard any risk to the female prisoners.

It was the above piece that inspired me to do a bit of digging. The Guardian has a history of exposing #DarkMoney & labyrinthine ownership structures, which mask influence or hide money. So this was where I started.

The Guardian itself reports that it has a unique ownership structure. Part of that structure is The Scott Trust. As you can see 👇 the Board of the Trust have ultimate editorial control & power to sack the editor (continues)

[Anthony Salz] is one of The Board members. He is also on the board of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation, which immediately looked familiar.

It was the Paul Hamlyn foundation that caught my eye because I had seen them referred to in the accounts of the Mermaids charity. (continues)

Another beneficiary is Gendered Intelligence. They are another key player in the debate women were told was not allowed to happen. I have seen them frequently referenced in Hansard. In particular as independent advisors on the management of trans prisoners (continues)

The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund another organisation “All About Trans” to enable them to employ a press officer and media trainer. They train “media professionals” from a number of different organisations. (continues)
gendercriticalwoman.wordpress.com/2019/07/15/why-are-the-guardian-suddenly-so-woeful-on-womens-rights/

I think this is a problem with BBC news, in particular the BBC News Channel. It's being produced for a global audience, probably to do with soft power and because the BBC prides itself on being a reliable source of information in countries that do not have a free press or much of a press at all. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, it often feels like the BBC covers local news and global news well, but stories that have a national but not international value get completely overlooked. It adds to the impression that the BBC is no longer in touch with people in the UK. It feels as if American cultural obsessions have crept in. I mean, when Trump was in office they had a whole daily show dedicated to discussing him. It was so out of proportion.

Guardian Live
'Being transgender and happy: fix society'
17 Jul 2015

"Paris Lees, Dr Kate Stone, Owen Jones, Peter Tatchell, Munroe Bergdorf and Jake Graf discuss the main issues facing the trans community today, and what we all need to do to ensure we live harmoniously and happily as one society."

(Freddie McDonnell/Dash also features as a representative of The Guardian)

The introduction by host, Paris Lees is significant in its call for allies.

This is a very illuminating thread. Plenty to mull over there. It does seem to be, some very rich people with far too much influence. Can we take these links as fact do you feel? Anyone done any checks on them?

The Guardian Live event will be an interesting watch this evening with a bottle of wine I think!

It is an interesting thread. And it's by the man who wrote the excellent The End of the World is Flat, a satire on the gender madness.

Two observations:

1. It's paradoxical that in the days when the Guardian was a much less successful brand, it was financially stable, whereas now, when it's apparently more successful, its financial situation is precarious.

1. It's equally paradoxical that at a time when the values of integrity and honest reporting that it was known for (at least to some of us) are being abandoned, it has become a much more desirable publication for young journalists to work in.

Excellent thread, OP, thank you. Interesting to see the business model/decisions behind how the paper has changed over the years. It's so far from the Manchester Guardian of my youth!

Just stumbled on this, today, quite interesting to see how clustered most media is to the left:

www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/

Interesting that both the BBC and the Guardian operate outside the market, having funding sources that are not governed by advertising or reflecting the wants and needs of the viewers, and are largely unaccountable. Both view themselves (and are viewed as) being on the side of the angels, democracy and the greater good, whilst being operated in a way that they and their supporters would sneer at if it were a different entity. They have low journalistic standards because they are largely unaccountable, outside of the PCC (which is a bit crap) and their own internal complaints procedures (total crap).

@TedImgoingmad

Interesting that both the BBC and the Guardian operate outside the market, having funding sources that are not governed by advertising or reflecting the wants and needs of the viewers, and are largely unaccountable. Both view themselves (and are viewed as) being on the side of the angels, democracy and the greater good, whilst being operated in a way that they and their supporters would sneer at if it were a different entity. They have low journalistic standards because they are largely unaccountable, outside of the PCC (which is a bit crap) and their own internal complaints procedures (total crap).

Yes, and added to that brew is that the fact that they are free, not paywalled, means they are the 'news' sources most likely to be used by younger people. They should therefore show even greater responsibility, care and caution, not less!

Thankyou to all for excellent posts on this thread, a few key things I'd forgotten but clearly all add to the perfect storm.

Another thing I remember in the late 90's early 00's was the sponsorship - I'm sure I remember the Guardian sponsored/ made the programmes at Glastonbury and I remember it everywhere at university.