Tangled Metal wrote:Used to get it as a student because there was a deal for it at the student's union. Year before it was the telegraph because they had a deal for students. Last year it was independent which had a deal. This was 20+ years ago. I have bought a newspaper very infrequently since then. You don't need it!
I read news from papers around the world often based on the outputs of search engine's news pages. I used to read a lot of good output from an English language Chinese newspaper's website. Actually less biased than the self important uk broadsheets from the UK believe it or not. Even Indian newspaper websites are better, even when reporting the Indian rape issues.
Other nations websites in like are a couple of Aussie sites, Canadian and a few US ones too. In fact it's often fun to see one in particular sticking it to trump!
So I'm afraid I'd rather read the Lancaster guardian than the national guardian newspaper.
BTW the comment is free section of the guardian's website is pure carp! It's supposed to allow critical thought to be published but anything that doesn't fit in with the guardian's editorial line get thinned out. They have token right of centre commentators but they're weak. The one good right of centre commentator got sacked for making comments not in.The guardian's editorial line. I can't remember the details it was a few years back. Caused a bit of a media uproar but everyone moved on and guardian carried on censoring right of centre commentary on the CiF strand. BTW comments section gets heavily censored too
I have been reading the comments section BTL for many years, and though you occasionally see posts modded for reasons that are not obvious, most of the time it only happens when a comment is actionable- libel, etc.. That does tend to include more right wing comments, but that isn't the G's fault, it's the commentators. The paper can't legally allow racist posts or incitement, for a start, and that sort of post tends to come a lot more from the right, though of course not exclusively, as do other actionable posts, so it's inevitable that there may be more right wing posts modded.
I'd not want to see it become like some other comments sections, full of hate and malice to the extent I'm surprised they're legal.
It's ridiculous to suggest that all comments have to follow the editorial line. Look at what they allow under Toynbee's articles. The G does allow some very direct critical comments towards their writers as well, unlike other papers where such comments are wiped out or all comments cut, though some do get modded on occasion. If you want evidence, read below any of Jonathan Jones' articles. Most of the commentators can't stand him (and neither can I, so that's why I notice those).