Any decent newspapers?
Discussion
Why don't you read a book?
If you're just reading a newspaper to kill time and you don't actually need to know the news this exact second then there is a good magazine called The Week that takes stories from the best newspapers and republishes them as a magazine.
If you're just reading a newspaper to kill time and you don't actually need to know the news this exact second then there is a good magazine called The Week that takes stories from the best newspapers and republishes them as a magazine.
Edited by zac510 on Wednesday 6th July 14:32
No list of rags would be complete without our esteemed weekly, the Teesdale Mercury.
Whilst the rest of the country has grappled with recession, phone-tapping and Pippa Middleton's bum, the Mercury has run a front page feature for the last four weeks on the Town Mayor allegedly falling out with a barmaid over how to pour a glass of shandy.
If that story is too big to digest, then this will surely cause PH indigestion.
The foremost garage in town is closing after 100 years.
http://www.teesdalemercury.co.uk/teesdale-news/sto...
Puts the NOTW scandal in the shade then?
Whilst the rest of the country has grappled with recession, phone-tapping and Pippa Middleton's bum, the Mercury has run a front page feature for the last four weeks on the Town Mayor allegedly falling out with a barmaid over how to pour a glass of shandy.
If that story is too big to digest, then this will surely cause PH indigestion.
The foremost garage in town is closing after 100 years.
http://www.teesdalemercury.co.uk/teesdale-news/sto...
Puts the NOTW scandal in the shade then?
Willie Dee said:
It used to be right wing but bearable, now it has an ex Daily Mail staff member running it it has gone down hill massively and isn't even trying to hide it.
Interesting to note that only the Guardian had the balls to go after the Murdoch empire and expose the NOTW hacking, it is a centre left wing paper but at the moment its the only one with any kind of credibility when it comes to investigative journalism.
Yes, the Telegraph is not what it was. Very much headed in the DM direction. You're guaranteed a pretty lady on the front page of the website, Angelina Jolie today, and the journalism is getting worse and worse. Interesting to note that only the Guardian had the balls to go after the Murdoch empire and expose the NOTW hacking, it is a centre left wing paper but at the moment its the only one with any kind of credibility when it comes to investigative journalism.
If you compared the coverage of Lulz sec recently between Guardian and Telegraph, you wouldn't think they were competing in a similar position in the market place. The Telegraph was just plain embarrassing.
Newsprint has a problem. They have lost journalists hand over fist because of poor circulation and dropping advertising revenue. Online doesn't give the same return on adverts although the DM is one of the, if not the, leading one online with regards to hits. Most of it is bought in rubbish.
Times online is really rubbish and not worth even the £1 per week I'm paying at the moment.
I have to read current news as I write articles and so go through all the online papers, hence having to pay for the Times, probably the clunkiest news outlet there. There is very little point I've found.
I also watch the news, Sky for what might interest the far right, BBC for the left and ITN for what must be the most unbiased news available. The irony is that the least biased source gives me the least copy.
We've had biased newspapers, most to the right, for a century. Before the war most supported Mosley and many of those who felt themselves under threat believed that they represented the common view of the masses.
Both the independent and guardian try to present themselves as middle of the road. The DM and the times make no such pretentions and the Telgraph - well, what can you say apart from how the mighty have fallen.
We are witnessing the end of newsprint as mass media I think. The Mail shows us the way. Turn into a comic. Certainly their influence is dropping away. Most of us get our news via TV and use papers as little more than entertainment.
I haven't bought newspapers regularly for years, not since outlets went online. The Times is a shadow of its former self, as are most papers. It is sad although we now have much more access to news than ever before.
One good point is that, with the multiplicity of sources, cover-ups are now much more difficult. Thirty years ago the phone hacking scandal would have been sleeved by the first police enquiry and everyone would have been happy. Now there's nowhere to hide. It is a fundamental change.
I've just researched an article on the Tour de France. Fair enough I know a fair bit but I needed a hook. After four hours online I had about four times as much information as I needed - and that was without going on Wiki. Even fifteen years ago it would have required a visit to a central library and twice as long to get less than a quarter of the information.
I would not have been able to write a current affairs article once a week without spending days on research. So why do we still have newspapers?
Nespapers are no longer the source of background information. Why should you read a newspaper column by the daugther of a television personality when the information you need is available online and written better?
I used to take a newspaper when I went on a train. Now I read a book.
I read the Eye every fortnight. That's the nearest I get to a newspaper.
I've been impressed by the Guardian's investigative bent over recent times. It certaily leaves most of the others far behind. It is biased in editorial to be sure but that's not so important nowadays when one reads from so many sources.
National newspapers have had their day I would suggest. Sad. I wanted to be a journalist when I was a kid. Being a kid nowdays would put you in good stead.
The last real throw of newspapers was Watergate. It's been downhill since then. There have been occasional flurries, with the expenses scandal and wikileaks but I do feel that there will be just two or three in the future, none of which have journalists working on them.
Times online is really rubbish and not worth even the £1 per week I'm paying at the moment.
I have to read current news as I write articles and so go through all the online papers, hence having to pay for the Times, probably the clunkiest news outlet there. There is very little point I've found.
I also watch the news, Sky for what might interest the far right, BBC for the left and ITN for what must be the most unbiased news available. The irony is that the least biased source gives me the least copy.
We've had biased newspapers, most to the right, for a century. Before the war most supported Mosley and many of those who felt themselves under threat believed that they represented the common view of the masses.
Both the independent and guardian try to present themselves as middle of the road. The DM and the times make no such pretentions and the Telgraph - well, what can you say apart from how the mighty have fallen.
We are witnessing the end of newsprint as mass media I think. The Mail shows us the way. Turn into a comic. Certainly their influence is dropping away. Most of us get our news via TV and use papers as little more than entertainment.
I haven't bought newspapers regularly for years, not since outlets went online. The Times is a shadow of its former self, as are most papers. It is sad although we now have much more access to news than ever before.
One good point is that, with the multiplicity of sources, cover-ups are now much more difficult. Thirty years ago the phone hacking scandal would have been sleeved by the first police enquiry and everyone would have been happy. Now there's nowhere to hide. It is a fundamental change.
I've just researched an article on the Tour de France. Fair enough I know a fair bit but I needed a hook. After four hours online I had about four times as much information as I needed - and that was without going on Wiki. Even fifteen years ago it would have required a visit to a central library and twice as long to get less than a quarter of the information.
I would not have been able to write a current affairs article once a week without spending days on research. So why do we still have newspapers?
Nespapers are no longer the source of background information. Why should you read a newspaper column by the daugther of a television personality when the information you need is available online and written better?
I used to take a newspaper when I went on a train. Now I read a book.
I read the Eye every fortnight. That's the nearest I get to a newspaper.
I've been impressed by the Guardian's investigative bent over recent times. It certaily leaves most of the others far behind. It is biased in editorial to be sure but that's not so important nowadays when one reads from so many sources.
National newspapers have had their day I would suggest. Sad. I wanted to be a journalist when I was a kid. Being a kid nowdays would put you in good stead.
The last real throw of newspapers was Watergate. It's been downhill since then. There have been occasional flurries, with the expenses scandal and wikileaks but I do feel that there will be just two or three in the future, none of which have journalists working on them.
DieselGriff said:
I'm currently reading Flat Earth News at the recommendation of another PHer on another thread. It is written by an obvious lefty who seems to be slightly clouded on some issues however it does open your eyes as to what, how and who "makes" news.
Whilst I've always been cynical about a lot of "news" I've begun to realise that I am in no way cynical enough. In the vast majority of cases "news" is simply regurgitated PR turd sometimes polished with a political stance, it doesn't matter who publishes it.
Flat Earth News is a great read and the author Nick Davies is a long-time writer for the Guardian although his own paper does not escape his criticism (and topically, Nick Davies was the one who first exposed the NOTW phone hacking in 2009.) Whilst I've always been cynical about a lot of "news" I've begun to realise that I am in no way cynical enough. In the vast majority of cases "news" is simply regurgitated PR turd sometimes polished with a political stance, it doesn't matter who publishes it.
IMHO the best (and only) papers to read on a regular basis are:
Daily: The Guardian
Weekly: The Economist
Fortnightly: Private Eye
Justayellowbadge said:
The Times is read by the people who run the country.
The Daily Mirror is read by the people who think they run the country.
The Guardian is read by the people who think they ought to run the country.
The Morning Star is read by the people who think the country ought to be run by another country.
The Independent is read by people who don't know who runs the country but are sure they're doing it wrong.
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country.
The Financial Times is read by the people who own the country.
The Daily Express is read by the people who think the country ought to be run as it used to be run.
The Daily Telegraph is read by the people who still think it is.
And the Sun's readers don't care who runs the country providing she has big tits.
You are Sir Humphrey AICMFP.The Daily Mirror is read by the people who think they run the country.
The Guardian is read by the people who think they ought to run the country.
The Morning Star is read by the people who think the country ought to be run by another country.
The Independent is read by people who don't know who runs the country but are sure they're doing it wrong.
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country.
The Financial Times is read by the people who own the country.
The Daily Express is read by the people who think the country ought to be run as it used to be run.
The Daily Telegraph is read by the people who still think it is.
And the Sun's readers don't care who runs the country providing she has big tits.
Lots of good info 
Bought The Times today and was impressed, guy i work with has been buying two from Sun/Mirror/Star and handing me one but i find it hard to get interested in anything. Probably get the Guardian tomorrow from current feedback, would love to try some of the 'lesser' ones mentioned but it's not like every shop has them.
I have an app on my phone called Classicly which has all books etc from the public domain free to download but i lose track reading only 15-20 minutes of them, especially with the ones i go for. A proper paper i can just scan for articles i'm interested in then get my munch on
ETA
Bought The Times today and was impressed, guy i work with has been buying two from Sun/Mirror/Star and handing me one but i find it hard to get interested in anything. Probably get the Guardian tomorrow from current feedback, would love to try some of the 'lesser' ones mentioned but it's not like every shop has them.
I have an app on my phone called Classicly which has all books etc from the public domain free to download but i lose track reading only 15-20 minutes of them, especially with the ones i go for. A proper paper i can just scan for articles i'm interested in then get my munch on
ETA
matchmaker said:
Up her in Scotland we also have the Daily Record
Edited by scottdav on Wednesday 6th July 22:53
scottdav said:
Lots of good info
Bought The Times today and was impressed, guy i work with has been buying two from Sun/Mirror/Star and handing me one but i find it hard to get interested in anything. Probably get the Guardian tomorrow from current feedback, would love to try some of the 'lesser' ones mentioned but it's not like every shop has them.
I have an app on my phone called Classicly which has all books etc from the public domain free to download but i lose track reading only 15-20 minutes of them, especially with the ones i go for. A proper paper i can just scan for articles i'm interested in then get my munch on
ETA
Fortnightly Private Eye to keep us abreast of the south of watford shenanigans.Bought The Times today and was impressed, guy i work with has been buying two from Sun/Mirror/Star and handing me one but i find it hard to get interested in anything. Probably get the Guardian tomorrow from current feedback, would love to try some of the 'lesser' ones mentioned but it's not like every shop has them.
I have an app on my phone called Classicly which has all books etc from the public domain free to download but i lose track reading only 15-20 minutes of them, especially with the ones i go for. A proper paper i can just scan for articles i'm interested in then get my munch on
ETA
matchmaker said:
Up her in Scotland we also have the Daily Record
Edited by scottdav on Wednesday 6th July 22:53
G350 said:
Derek Smith said:
Excellent analysis
Derek, I really appreciate all your comments and I couldn't agree more ^^^^^The comments about the Telegraph in the thread resonate strongly for me. I have read it for some years now but will not be renewing my subscription. I will probably move to the Guardian.
G350 said:
Flat Earth News is a great read and the author Nick Davies is a long-time writer for the Guardian although his own paper does not escape his criticism (and topically, Nick Davies was the one who first exposed the NOTW phone hacking in 2009.)
IMHO the best (and only) papers to read on a regular basis are:
Daily: The Guardian
Weekly: The Economist
Fortnightly: Private Eye
The Economist is a decent read, if rather political. Maybe I should renew my subscription to it.IMHO the best (and only) papers to read on a regular basis are:
Daily: The Guardian
Weekly: The Economist
Fortnightly: Private Eye
I'm not always an enthusiast of Nick Davies to be honest. He has done some good work but I find him sensationalist and highly selective of facts. To "debunk" a myth, sometimes he seems to create one. Though he is a talented writer with considerable wit I would never take anything he says at face value. I find there is a significant subtext in some of his work.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff