3 ms·

> The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris. Isn’t The Guardian a UK publication?

ThomPete 2y ago
[flagged]
seydor 2y ago
Yes https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/ng-interactive/2024/oct/23/the-guardian-view-on-the-us-presidential-election-2024-a-democratic-government-is-the-one-we-need https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/ng-interactive/202...
skissane 2y ago
> Isn’t The Guardian a UK publication? Yes and no. For many decades they only operated in the UK. More recently they have launched digital-only US and Australia editions, whose editors are based in the US and Australia respectively, creating content aimed at each country’s audience using local journalists, but the three editions share content for stories of global significance. But still their HQ is in the UK, and I believe their UK staff and readerships are significantly larger than their US or Australia operations
jfengel 2y ago
Yes, they are a UK publication. But they cover a lot of US news and have a significant American readership. So, like American newspapers, they have an informed opinion and an audience that wishes to hear that opinion. That's how newspaper endorsements work. In this case the writer of the endorsement cannot themselves vote, but their opinion can still have weight. The Economist, another UK-based periodical with a more right-wing stance, explains why it endorses candidates: https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/10/31/why-the-economist-endorses-political-candidates https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/10/31/...
- adastra22 2y ago
  At least here in America, endorsement of foreign politicians is seen as election interference, and generally not done.
  - jfengel 2y ago
    Newspapers don't generally do it, but I've never seen it as a matter of avoiding interference. Rather, it's just that we simply don't have much interest one way or the other in most elections. The newspapers don't spend a lot of time covering them and would not consider themselves sufficiently knowledgeable to make an endorsement. The American election is special, in that it's the "leader of the free world". What we do here affects everybody, in a way that even the leadership of Germany, France, and England doesn't. Perhaps we'd have an opinion about the leadership in Russia or China, but they don't have free elections. The government should probably refrain from making an endorsement, but if people can't figure out the distinction between a government and a newspaper, that's their own lookout.
gerdesj 2y ago
It's the Grauniad.
rsynnott 2y ago
It has a US version, with its own editor and some of its own reporting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_US This is somewhat common for British media groups; the Guardian also has Australian and New Zealand versions, and the BBC has _loads_ of regional versions.

[flagged]

Yes https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/ng-interactive/2024/oct/23/the-guardian-view-on-the-us-presidential-election-2024-a-democratic-government-is-the-one-we-need https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/ng-interactive/202...

skissane 2y ago

> Isn’t The Guardian a UK publication? Yes and no. For many decades they only operated in the UK. More recently they have launched digital-only US and Australia editions, whose editors are based in the US and Australia respectively, creating content aimed at each country’s audience using local journalists, but the three editions share content for stories of global significance. But still their HQ is in the UK, and I believe their UK staff and readerships are significantly larger than their US or Australia operations

jfengel 2y ago

Yes, they are a UK publication. But they cover a lot of US news and have a significant American readership. So, like American newspapers, they have an informed opinion and an audience that wishes to hear that opinion. That's how newspaper endorsements work. In this case the writer of the endorsement cannot themselves vote, but their opinion can still have weight. The Economist, another UK-based periodical with a more right-wing stance, explains why it endorses candidates: https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/10/31/why-the-economist-endorses-political-candidates https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/10/31/...

adastra22 2y ago
At least here in America, endorsement of foreign politicians is seen as election interference, and generally not done.
- jfengel 2y ago
  Newspapers don't generally do it, but I've never seen it as a matter of avoiding interference. Rather, it's just that we simply don't have much interest one way or the other in most elections. The newspapers don't spend a lot of time covering them and would not consider themselves sufficiently knowledgeable to make an endorsement. The American election is special, in that it's the "leader of the free world". What we do here affects everybody, in a way that even the leadership of Germany, France, and England doesn't. Perhaps we'd have an opinion about the leadership in Russia or China, but they don't have free elections. The government should probably refrain from making an endorsement, but if people can't figure out the distinction between a government and a newspaper, that's their own lookout.

gerdesj 2y ago

It's the Grauniad.

rsynnott 2y ago

It has a US version, with its own editor and some of its own reporting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_US This is somewhat common for British media groups; the Guardian also has Australian and New Zealand versions, and the BBC has _loads_ of regional versions.