[OldRidgeback]

 

A good piece in the Grauniad….

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/08/cycling-growth-uk-risk-left-behind-europe-experts?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1659958084

Topic

[Simon E]

Awavey wrote:

well your starting position is the “extreme right wingers took over the conservative party” so of course you are going to think the Guardian is merely “centrist”.

So the right-wingers haven’t taken over the Conservative party? Was John Major’s government as hardline as this lot? I think not.

The idea that the Guardian is centrist is not my own opinion but something I’ve seen mentioned frequently over the last 20-30 years. Perhaps I should have read the Telegraph more for balance (though from what I’ve seen it’s more likely to make me angry).

Awavey wrote:

social media appears to have destroyed peoples ability to understand politics IMO and take a neutral, bi-partisan stance on a number of issues, its all about taking the stance that gets the most likes.

Or is it that the way social media algorithms function means people see more of one polarised set of opinions which are then amplified by a large number of followers. Without going into targeted advertising, Cambridge Analytica and so on, how did the ‘influencers’ build these followers in the first place?

But did many people have a neutral stance before social media? I doubt it. Most people used to choose a newspaper because of its stance, even if they pretend that it’s somehow neutral or objective. And every country has had leaders and voices that seem to be able to manipulate and mislead a large chunk of the population so that is nothing new.

[Awavey]

well your starting position

well your starting position is the “extreme right wingers took over the conservative party” so of course you are going to think the Guardian is merely “centrist”.

frankly Im surprised you didnt think the Morning Star was far more “centrist” than the Guardian at this point who were clearly leaning to the “right wing”.

social media appears to have destroyed peoples ability to understand politics IMO and take a neutral, bi-partisan stance on a number of issues, its all about taking the stance that gets the most likes.

[Awavey]

their bike blog exists only

their bike blog exists only in their environmental section coverage, the people, well Pete has I dont know what Lauras take is, that write the blogs have stated a number of times, its not a pro cycling blog position the paper are taking.

[ktache]

And it’s got a Bike Blog.

And it’s got a Bike Blog.

Is institutionally pro cycling.

And some excellent writers…

[Simon E]

Rich_cb wrote:

Rich_cb wrote:

Unfortunately the Guardian is free to read (thanks, ironically, to its offshore bank accounts) so receives far more attention compared to its paywalled right wing equivalents and this tends to distort debate somewhat.

Unlike the Telegraph, there isn’t much wealth behind the Guardian and I would argue that any chance to compare the two is hindered by the fact that the Telegraph’s choice to be paywalled. The debate is not really distorted, it’s just that we can’t easily compare those 2 media outlets.

I also think that you’re overstating the Guardian’s left wing leanings; it is broadly supportive of the rights of workers, ethnic minorities and immigrants (for example) and has recently made environmental issues and Climate Change more prominent.

But it is still widely considered to be fairly centrist* in its overall position, it’s not bursting with militant left-wing propaganda. The term “Guardian reader” has for a long time been a bit of a put-down, a byword for middle-class / aspirational people with comfortable lives who didn’t want to be seen with a tabloid paper (or a Tory one, for that matter).

The fact that the Guardian omits stories that don’t fit its agenda is not really worth a mention, since every publication does that!

“The Guardian is owned by The Scott Trust, whose core purpose is to ensure the financial and editorial independence of the Guardian in perpetuity … we don’t have a wealthy owner pulling the strings, and any profits are reinvested into our journalism rather than into shareholders’ pockets.” [source]

According to Wikipedia the Scott Trust Limited is governed according to the articles of association, set up in 2008 and filed at Companies House.

“Guardian Media Group has business operations in the UK, US and Australia. The Group’s assets are held entirely by companies in these countries and are fully subject to prevailing tax laws and regulations.” [source]

* at least, what we used to think of centrist politics before the more extreme right-wingers took over the Conservative party.

[Rich_cb]

The Guardian is generally
The Guardian is generally factual but it also deliberately omits stories which don’t fit their narrative and they present some stories in an entirely misleading way.

The Telegraph (which does exactly the same) is essentially its polar opposite politically and reading both papers coverage of certain subjects you would struggle to recognise they were actually covering the same thing.

Unfortunately the Guardian is free to read (thanks, ironically, to its offshore bank accounts) so receives far more attention compared to its paywalled right wing equivalents and this tends to distort debate somewhat.

[don simon fbpe]

The main difference being

The main difference being that the Mail is extreme right wing and full of lies. Gaurdian is indeed left wing but generally factual. Of course they’re putting their political leaning on it. What an absurd statement.

[chrisonabike]

Well since it’s the NCN you

Well since it’s the NCN you’re going to be walking some of the time anyways so maybe that’s a good enough compromise.

A few years back I spent a day travelling from Helensburgh to Edinburgh using some of the NCN – in theory to save actually getting the map / phone out.  A good day out – there are some beautiful / interesting sections.  However it’s especially recommended for fans of alleyways, industrial estates, rough-looking estates, extremely varied surfaces, broken glass and meandering.  It didn’t save me route-finding time (a very optimistic assumption in most urban areas).  And given the amount of urban terrain to be traversed even in a straight line encountering that sort of thing isn’t surprising.  The NCN routes don’t really do straight lines though…

[wycombewheeler]

chrisonatrike wrote:

The Notional Cycle Network you say?  Think mattw will need more than a gravel bike for some of that…

No, because some of it is too steep to ride a heavy full suss mountain bike up the hills. You need to hit the sweet spot of low weight AND off road capability

[joe9090]

.

.

.you. are. f.reaky. but. . I don.t like .yuou .anywys.

..

.

[hawkinspeter]

Flintshire Boy wrote:

How do I join the wonderful simplicity of your black and white world?

Just check out the reliability of their reporting – it’s not difficult to separate fact from fiction.

Here’s a couple of starter links for you that summarise their reporting:

From: https://www.thefactual.com/blog/is-the-guardian-reliable/

Over a dataset of 1,000 articles, The Guardian scored an average Factual Grade of 64.8%. This is slightly above the average of 61.9% for all 240 news sources that we analyzed. This places the newspaper in the 60th percentile of our dataset.

From: https://www.thefactual.com/blog/is-the-daily-mail-reliable/

Over a dataset of 1,000 articles, the Daily Mail scored an average Factual Grade of 39.7%. This is well below the average of 61.9% for all 240 news sources that we analyzed. This places the site in the 1st percentile of our dataset — it scored the third-lowest of any news source.

You will also notice that I am providing links and external sources to back up my claim. Feel free to respond with a similar level of accountability, though I suspect you just wish to make some political snipe rather than being interested in what’s actually going on.

[Hirsute]

Judging by your posts, you

Judging by your posts, you have been in one for a very long time.

[Flintshire Boy]

.

.

How do I join the wonderful simplicity of your black and white world?

.

[hawkinspeter]

Gimpl wrote:

EddyBerckx wrote:

Gimpl wrote:

‘A good piece in the Grauniad….’

Just like saying – ‘A good piece in the Heil….’

For it’s faults…no it bloody isn’t.

Both just comics. Both utterly biased. Both rubbish.

The Gradinua bases its reporting on facts, whereas the Heil just makes shit up.

[Gimpl]

EddyBerckx wrote:

Gimpl wrote:

‘A good piece in the Grauniad….’

Just like saying – ‘A good piece in the Heil….’

For it’s faults…no it bloody isn’t.

Both just comics. Both utterly biased. Both rubbish.

[Author]

Replies