User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#100019
That's how I feel.

I have donated in the past, but I won't any more. Jones is a big name columnist, and every paper needs those. So I give him a pass, in more ways than one. I'm more irritated with the one-sidedness of Monbiot, who's supposed to be rigorous because he puts in footnotes on his website. (I may have mentioned him before). There's the "Why does Farage get so much media time?" when every other day it seems his face is peaking out from the online blog. There's the easy time the Lib Dems and Greens are getting, which is so obviously going to be the line taken at the next election. There's the "never mind the bond markets, maaaan" stuff. And there's the constant nimby stuff.

And Simon Jenkins. His apparently very large salary is a very quick saving they could make.

There are experts on every subject under the sun very easy to look up on social media. And, presumably, just as keen to write for money as anyone else. It's been quite uncomfortable (politically for me) to see so many getting stuck into Labour on tax. But I recognize their expertise, and I'd like to read articles by them. I recall the old editor of Rail, Nigel Harris, writing an article for The Spectator on the problems with HS2 (Treasury overspecifying because of paranoia about future risk). He said nobody else had asked him. Why ask an expert when you can wheel out Jenkins and co to tell you it's corruption?

Perhaps it's a bit like the BBC nowadays, should be much better, but also in a genuinely difficult position with the fragmentation of politics, media etc. And perhaps I'll miss it when it's gone (behind a paywall). But it's not doing enough for me at the moment.
User avatar
By Boiler
#100029
I have an account with the Guardian but I don't subscribe (if that makes any sense) and at no point have I been limited in what I read? Sure, I too get the begging bowl but I just click it away...
User avatar
By Dalem Lake
#100036
Maybe it depends on how many articles you read in a day because I've had the begging bowl pop-ups but never any restrictions. I mainly just look at the headlines and the only columnist I really have any time for is John Harris and his "Anywhere But Westminster" stuff because he at least gets out of London and shows the bleakness of some of our towns. I might be tempted to donate if they got rid of Adrian Chiles though, as even the thought of his piss-poor columns getting an airing in any paper brings out an irrational rage in me. I understand he's the editor's husband.
By Youngian
#100114
Adrian having a news story would indeed be surprising.
Attachments
Screenshot_20251115_220321_Samsung Internet.jpg
Screenshot_20251115_220321_Samsung Internet.jpg (236.1 KiB) Viewed 283 times
By Rosvanian
#100128
I subscribe to the Guardian. I do this because despite its many, many shortcomings, it stands pretty much alone in the mainstream, dominated as that is, by the coordinated, massed ranks of hateful far right outlets hellbent on getting Farage into power. It still punches above its weight and it and its readership are loathed more than ever by its richer, more powerful enemies. For me, that is a badge of honour.
kreuzberger, Abernathy, Boiler and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#100139
Chiles was very good on Working Lunch back in the day, which was more of a magazine programme than a news programme, but did respond to news and handled it well.

Why has he become something more akin to a "humorist"?
By Youngian
#100145
Working Lunch was very much admired in business journalist circles for being watchable and drew a large audience of City traders having err a working lunch. If a PR got a client mentioned on Working Lunch their shares increased in the afternoon.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#100147
Wasn't it good? I also liked the shares guy, who gave a nice sense of real time dynamism, and explained why some shares might be moving.

Another thing Working Lunch did well was get trade union people on, which is something that has always been too rare. Even if like Paul Novak on the OBR today, they sometimes get things wrong.
By Youngian
#100149
Adam Shaw. Steph McGovern is the nearest to recreating that vibe but hasn’t had a good partner to bounce off. Her finance and economics podcast with Peston is an example of being less than the sum of your parts.
Katherine Birbalsingh

Fuuuuck... So wrong on so many levels....

Your Party

One thing I hear from sections of the left is that[…]

Trump 2.0 Lunacy

Here's another cracker. The "Signatu[…]

The Guardian

That's right, Adam Shaw. Steph McGovern does[…]