3 ms·
The press pushing an agenda for either side and not remaining an impartial observer is a huge part of the problem, not only with Brexit. I'm not sure if in for
by corty 6y ago
The press pushing an agenda for either side and not remaining an impartial observer is a huge part of the problem, not only with Brexit.
I'm not sure if in former times the press was just as opinionated and noone noticed. But now, people notice that the press isn't impartial and therefore just do not trust even the rare instances of impartial facts being presented.
- pjc50 6y agoBritish press has never really pretended to be impartial; the Daily Mail under Lord Rothermere ran pro-Hitler editorial until the war broke out. (My point about Johnson was that he was genuinely paid more for a while as a Times "columnist" than as Prime Minister)
- rjsw 6y agoHe was most recently a Telegraph columnist, he was sacked from the Times.
- donarb 6y agoThat's nothing. In 1939, The New York Times did an article about Hitler and his mountain retreat at Berchtesgaden, about how he goes there to unwind and be amongst nature. https://www.nytimes.com/1939/08/20/archives/herr-hitler-at-home-in-the-clouds-high-up-on-his-favorite-mountain.html https://www.nytimes.com/1939/08/20/archives/herr-hitler-at-h...
- dragonwriter 6y ago> I'm not sure if in former times the press was just as opinionated and noone noticed. Everyone noticed. It's one of the most frequently discussed things about the British (though not uniquely theirs) press for centuries, both in terms of explicit comment and implicit cultural reference (e.g., such as it being a recurring background element of fiction.)