5 ms·

The guardian is very left leaning as well, a more neutral paper would be better.

pjc50 11y ago
There are basically no neutral papers in the UK. The Independent sort of tries, and the FT/Economist tend to be accurate with the facts but reflexively probusiness/neoliberal.
- iamwithnail 11y ago
  There's no requirement to or expectation that they will be. Papers are not required to present any kind of balance, as long as what they say is broadly true (external pluralism), for a given value of true. The broadcast media (the free-to-air ones) are required to be demonstrably internally pluralistic, to show a variety of sources and viewpoints within their output - and that applies across BBC, ITV, Ch4 and Channel 5, but not Sky News; goes back to when Radio came on stream in the 1930s.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Yes. Americans keep expecting "neutrality", which is hard to define and impossible to achieve.
- jazzyk 11y ago
  The Economist is increasingly pro-BIG-business, pro-establishment, rather than fair/free-market (as it used to be).
  - marcoperaza 11y ago
    Good to know that I'm not the only one who's noticed this. It used to be my favorite paper, but I'm disappointed with the direction it's taken lately.
- justincormack 11y ago
  The FT is not that neoliberal, it is fairly generally liberal, and generally more left wing than most of its readership by quite a margin, although it is quite varied.
Loic 11y ago
A newspaper cannot be neutral. The real problem with the BBC is that it is officially proud to be neutral but it is not. I way prefer a lot of non neutral papers, where I know before hand their base political/economic/social views. This way I can go and read both sides of the story or if not that important, read just one side knowing that it is a partial view.
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  The BBC is by far the most neutral news source I have ever encountered. It's constantly subject to attack by both the government and the public, to the extent that it's terrified to take a stance on any issue.
  - Loic 11y ago
    This is what you think and this is the problem because you are not alone at all. I highly recommend you reading this book: "NEWSPEAK in the 21st Century". It is highlighting the fact that the BBC is not neutral for a lot of critical issues. This is why I prefer "opinionated" papers. Sorry for this thread going maybe a bit off-topic, but this a subject I am pretty attached too. Again, I am not saying that the BBC is not doing great work, but just that it is not as neutral as what the opinion think it is. http://www.amazon.co.uk/NEWSPEAK-21st-Century-David-Edwards/dp/0745328938/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/NEWSPEAK-21st-Century-David-Edwards/...
    - sdoering 11y ago
      Thanks for the book tip will have a look at it. Having worked in news for some years and seen how (esp. online) news are produced and weighted for priority, it is to say, that it is quite a sad state of affairs. I stopped reading the news, following any news at all. If news do reach me and my interest exceeds a internal threshold, I start investigating the topic further. So having a view from outside my home country might be interesting.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Cowardice is not neutrality. This is how we get global warming denialism given unreasonable amounts of airtime, using the "Views On Shape Of Earth Differ" approach.
mtgx 11y ago
Left-leaning? So privacy is a left-wing thing?
- jazzyk 11y ago
  Left and right are increasingly meaningless labels. These days it is more pro-establishment vs anti-establishment. For example, the most vocal people on privacy are an amalgam of independent thinkers on the "left" (The Guardian, etc) and independent thinkers on the "right" (Ron Paul, etc.) While the "leftist" Hillary Clinton calls Snowden a traitor (so do a lot of "right"-wing people, too).
  - justincormack 11y ago
    Although Britain's left wing party, Labour, is pro surveillance, even it seems under Corbyn, who is himself a target.

pjc50 11y ago

There are basically no neutral papers in the UK. The Independent sort of tries, and the FT/Economist tend to be accurate with the facts but reflexively probusiness/neoliberal.

iamwithnail 11y ago
There's no requirement to or expectation that they will be. Papers are not required to present any kind of balance, as long as what they say is broadly true (external pluralism), for a given value of true. The broadcast media (the free-to-air ones) are required to be demonstrably internally pluralistic, to show a variety of sources and viewpoints within their output - and that applies across BBC, ITV, Ch4 and Channel 5, but not Sky News; goes back to when Radio came on stream in the 1930s.
- pjc50 11y ago
  Yes. Americans keep expecting "neutrality", which is hard to define and impossible to achieve.
jazzyk 11y ago
The Economist is increasingly pro-BIG-business, pro-establishment, rather than fair/free-market (as it used to be).
- marcoperaza 11y ago
  Good to know that I'm not the only one who's noticed this. It used to be my favorite paper, but I'm disappointed with the direction it's taken lately.
justincormack 11y ago
The FT is not that neoliberal, it is fairly generally liberal, and generally more left wing than most of its readership by quite a margin, although it is quite varied.

Loic 11y ago

A newspaper cannot be neutral. The real problem with the BBC is that it is officially proud to be neutral but it is not. I way prefer a lot of non neutral papers, where I know before hand their base political/economic/social views. This way I can go and read both sides of the story or if not that important, read just one side knowing that it is a partial view.

matthewmacleod 11y ago
The BBC is by far the most neutral news source I have ever encountered. It's constantly subject to attack by both the government and the public, to the extent that it's terrified to take a stance on any issue.
- Loic 11y ago
  This is what you think and this is the problem because you are not alone at all. I highly recommend you reading this book: "NEWSPEAK in the 21st Century". It is highlighting the fact that the BBC is not neutral for a lot of critical issues. This is why I prefer "opinionated" papers. Sorry for this thread going maybe a bit off-topic, but this a subject I am pretty attached too. Again, I am not saying that the BBC is not doing great work, but just that it is not as neutral as what the opinion think it is. http://www.amazon.co.uk/NEWSPEAK-21st-Century-David-Edwards/dp/0745328938/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/NEWSPEAK-21st-Century-David-Edwards/...
  - sdoering 11y ago
    Thanks for the book tip will have a look at it. Having worked in news for some years and seen how (esp. online) news are produced and weighted for priority, it is to say, that it is quite a sad state of affairs. I stopped reading the news, following any news at all. If news do reach me and my interest exceeds a internal threshold, I start investigating the topic further. So having a view from outside my home country might be interesting.
- pjc50 11y ago
  Cowardice is not neutrality. This is how we get global warming denialism given unreasonable amounts of airtime, using the "Views On Shape Of Earth Differ" approach.

mtgx 11y ago

Left-leaning? So privacy is a left-wing thing?

jazzyk 11y ago
Left and right are increasingly meaningless labels. These days it is more pro-establishment vs anti-establishment. For example, the most vocal people on privacy are an amalgam of independent thinkers on the "left" (The Guardian, etc) and independent thinkers on the "right" (Ron Paul, etc.) While the "leftist" Hillary Clinton calls Snowden a traitor (so do a lot of "right"-wing people, too).
- justincormack 11y ago
  Although Britain's left wing party, Labour, is pro surveillance, even it seems under Corbyn, who is himself a target.