14 ms·

> I have a couple of observations: firstly, it's interesting that the Guardian is considered to be dead-centre, while most in the UK would say that it's quite o

> I have a couple of observations: firstly, it's interesting that the Guardian is considered to be dead-centre, while most in the UK would say that it's quite on the left. I found that surprising. Who? Both Ad Fontes and AllSides say that The Guardian merely skews to the left, and Ad Fontes' analysis concludes that it's one of the "most reliable". (Ad Fontes' analysis here: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/the-guardian-bias-and-reliability/ https://www.adfontesmedia.com/the-guardian-bias-and-reliabil...) I haven't seen anyone say that it's "quite on the left" in any sphere other than the partisan right. Edit: Even OP's project seems to represent the modest left-skew accurately. Can you help me understand where your "dead-centre"-on-OP's-platform v. "quite on the left" interpretations came from? https://i.imgur.com/NTmQERS.png https://i.imgur.com/NTmQERS.png

pessimizer 6y ago
Tory UK tends to characterize the Guardian as raving lefty lunatics, just as the right characterizes the NYT in the US.
- nomdep 6y ago
  Not lunatics but very raving leftist for the last four years.
chrisseaton 6y ago
People aren’t great at distinguishing comment and editorial from the news. It’s probably true that the Guardian’s news is centre-left, as you say. However their comment and editorial is usually pretty far left (Seumas Milne, Owen Jones, etc), and that’s what gets noticed and gives them this reputation. https://somuchguardian.tumblr.com/ https://somuchguardian.tumblr.com/
- kingsuper20 6y ago
  I'd say that it's essentially all editorial at this point. It strikes me as several waves peaking at the same time. One being normal civilization cycles that result in political violence, another being a death of professional standards in reporting. To be fair, some eras of broadsheets, pamphlets, newspapers were just as manipulative as the modern ones. A practice I try to stick to is to read non-Anglosphere (and particularly non-US) newspapers only. For one thing, the rest of the world appears to keep on keepin' on and isn't overly concerned with the minutiae of US palace politics or the Chauvin trial.
makomk 6y ago
I think that mostly shows the limits of their analysis. The Guardian is basically the left-wing paper in the UK; I don't think there's anything to the left of them outside of fairly fringe, niche, and very fragmented publications. Internal disputes within the left play out within their comment section, whilst the news section often seems to attacking the right wing as its main goal.
- eganist 6y ago
  > I think that mostly shows the limits of their analysis. The Guardian is basically the left-wing paper in the UK; I don't think there's anything to the left of them outside of fairly fringe, niche, and very fragmented publications. Internal disputes within the left play out within their comment section, whilst the news section often seems to attacking the right wing as its main goal. This only reinforces the meta-point. Everyone's sharing their perception without citing anything. So far, the few research entities looking into media bias are all asserting (with randomly sampled data points as best as I can tell) that The Guardian presents reliable news with a left-leaning opinion skew, whereas self-selected commenters (i.e. those who chose to reply to my initial comment) here are asserting from their own perception that The Guardian's "basically the left-wing paper," "editorial is usually pretty far left," and "quite on the left." There's value in learning the methodologies employed by these analysis firms and think tanks, deciding whether you agree with how their analysis is performed, and upon deciding, either performing the same (time consuming) analysis yourself or delegating to the group(s) who's methods you most align with. That's largely why I'm fine with Ad Fontes. I haven't looked into how AllSides draws their conclusions, but either way, they're both in agreement re: The Guardian. This is a healthier way to conclude how a news outlet leans compared to just going by our own perception.
  - SunlightEdge 6y ago
    Agreed on biased perceptions of the guardian. Rightly or wrongly, there is a perception out there that the Guardian's comment section in particular is pretty left wing particularly on identity politics stuff. Even if the core paper is pretty central - e.g. It broadly supported the Blairites over the Corbynites over past few years. It would be really interesting to have some visual data on their comments section here compared to other papers e.g. of numbers of articles on say class, race, gender and some kind of ranking of their left wing / right wing strength. And likewise for regular reported core news/articles. As it stands there might be a lot of bias in people's individual views- including this comment. Still it is interesting to compare articles. It's a cool site.
barry-cotter 6y ago
I’m impressed. This really shows the utility of lying often, loudly, publicly and repeatedly in shaping public opinion and perception. I stopped reading any British newspaper but the Guardian in the early 2000s but the idea that it’s any less partisan than the Fabian Society...

pessimizer 6y ago

Tory UK tends to characterize the Guardian as raving lefty lunatics, just as the right characterizes the NYT in the US.

nomdep 6y ago
Not lunatics but very raving leftist for the last four years.

chrisseaton 6y ago

People aren’t great at distinguishing comment and editorial from the news. It’s probably true that the Guardian’s news is centre-left, as you say. However their comment and editorial is usually pretty far left (Seumas Milne, Owen Jones, etc), and that’s what gets noticed and gives them this reputation. https://somuchguardian.tumblr.com/ https://somuchguardian.tumblr.com/

kingsuper20 6y ago
I'd say that it's essentially all editorial at this point. It strikes me as several waves peaking at the same time. One being normal civilization cycles that result in political violence, another being a death of professional standards in reporting. To be fair, some eras of broadsheets, pamphlets, newspapers were just as manipulative as the modern ones. A practice I try to stick to is to read non-Anglosphere (and particularly non-US) newspapers only. For one thing, the rest of the world appears to keep on keepin' on and isn't overly concerned with the minutiae of US palace politics or the Chauvin trial.

makomk 6y ago

I think that mostly shows the limits of their analysis. The Guardian is basically the left-wing paper in the UK; I don't think there's anything to the left of them outside of fairly fringe, niche, and very fragmented publications. Internal disputes within the left play out within their comment section, whilst the news section often seems to attacking the right wing as its main goal.

eganist 6y ago
> I think that mostly shows the limits of their analysis. The Guardian is basically the left-wing paper in the UK; I don't think there's anything to the left of them outside of fairly fringe, niche, and very fragmented publications. Internal disputes within the left play out within their comment section, whilst the news section often seems to attacking the right wing as its main goal. This only reinforces the meta-point. Everyone's sharing their perception without citing anything. So far, the few research entities looking into media bias are all asserting (with randomly sampled data points as best as I can tell) that The Guardian presents reliable news with a left-leaning opinion skew, whereas self-selected commenters (i.e. those who chose to reply to my initial comment) here are asserting from their own perception that The Guardian's "basically the left-wing paper," "editorial is usually pretty far left," and "quite on the left." There's value in learning the methodologies employed by these analysis firms and think tanks, deciding whether you agree with how their analysis is performed, and upon deciding, either performing the same (time consuming) analysis yourself or delegating to the group(s) who's methods you most align with. That's largely why I'm fine with Ad Fontes. I haven't looked into how AllSides draws their conclusions, but either way, they're both in agreement re: The Guardian. This is a healthier way to conclude how a news outlet leans compared to just going by our own perception.
- SunlightEdge 6y ago
  Agreed on biased perceptions of the guardian. Rightly or wrongly, there is a perception out there that the Guardian's comment section in particular is pretty left wing particularly on identity politics stuff. Even if the core paper is pretty central - e.g. It broadly supported the Blairites over the Corbynites over past few years. It would be really interesting to have some visual data on their comments section here compared to other papers e.g. of numbers of articles on say class, race, gender and some kind of ranking of their left wing / right wing strength. And likewise for regular reported core news/articles. As it stands there might be a lot of bias in people's individual views- including this comment. Still it is interesting to compare articles. It's a cool site.

barry-cotter 6y ago

I’m impressed. This really shows the utility of lying often, loudly, publicly and repeatedly in shaping public opinion and perception. I stopped reading any British newspaper but the Guardian in the early 2000s but the idea that it’s any less partisan than the Fabian Society...