Newspapers?

[Jared]

Do you read any newspapers, or do you read the news online?

Honestly, I prefer to read newspapers if I had the choice, it's eaiser on your eyes and there's usually more in them.

At the moment, I have a mix between The Times and the Financial Times in terms of what papers to read.

Which newspapers do you read, if any?

 

[Digerati]

I watch CNN Headline News in the morning, then CBS and/or NBC news at night. Then I get my local weekly newspaper, and the weekend editions (which includes Friday for some reason) of the Omaha World Journal.

The problem with printed newspapers is it is often not new by the time it gets delivered. But they do tend to go into more depth and background, which I like.

 

[Will]

I read the Guardian and BBC online, but mainly the Guardian.

Very occasionally I'll grab a print copy. I used to regularly read Private Eye as well, but not as much lately.

 

[Jared]

I read the Guardian and BBC online, but mainly the Guardian.

Very occasionally I'll grab a print copy. I used to regularly read Private Eye as well, but not as much lately.

The Guardian is a good paper, but I don't read it though because it's quite left wing.
I've found that the cheaper the newspaper, the worse it usually is. It's not strictly true, but I've found that it seems to be a good correlation.

 

[Digerati]

...but I don't read it though because it's quite left wing.

This is where I think "the press" have overstepped their bounds. IMO, newspapers and the media in general should not be right or left - they should just report the facts of the news and only the facts without sensationalizing or adding their own biases.

If they want to editorialize, it should be done in "editorials" on the editorial pages only. NOT in the news articles or on the front page in big headlines. To get the full picture of what is really happening, we are forced to get our news from multiple sources, but then we really don't know who to believe!

Truth be told (at least from my opinionated viewpoint), much of what's wrong with the world today can be blamed on misrepresentations by the media (and shysters!).

 

[niemiro]

I tend to dot around with the papers I read. I like the variety and particularly like reading certain articles on the same topic in different papers.

I read the BBC online for the main news, Daily Mail online for another perspective, physical copies of the Metro for the weird and quirky when I'm near a train station, my father's Times for some more variety, the Economist for certain articles, a couple of scientific and climbing periodicals or journals, then a whole mixture of other online stuff (e.g. I might visit Huffington post and read five or so top articles there, next day somewhere else).

Just as I don't use the same web browser every day (I use five regularly), and just as with so much in my life, I like variety. So I read a different combination of paper and online news websites every day.

 

[Will]

The Guardian is probably one of the most transparent with their bias. Most of their coverage is pretty fair and reasonable, and where they have a stance they're pretty clear to state it. The only time I've seen it be less obvious (and this happens with all media outlets) is looking at which stories they prioritise on and cover more. E.g. an anti-UKIP article might get more coverage than another article, but you can also easily argue that it's reasonable and fair to prioritise articles you believe are going to be of more interest to your readers. Boko Haram might be infinitely more significant to cover than UKIP, but sadly most people aren't interested.

Reporting has to be fair and accurate, it also has to not be influenced by financials/advertising for it to be a legitimate news source. Sadly the Telegraph and Times are hugely influenced by their owners (Murdoch for the Times), and the Telegraph was recently in a scandal for failing to adequately report negative press on their largest advertiser, HSBC - negative stories about HSBC were dropped as they threatened to withdraw their advertising. Likewise, the Telegraph recently published a list of "business owners" who supported the Conservatives on their website - the problem with this is that the document was authored by Conservative HQ. Isn't meta data wonderful?

You couldn't pay me to read the Daily Mail. It's a hateful publication with such an obvious agenda and mis-truths that even hardcore conservatives think it's a bit much...

I don't agree that a newspaper shouldn't have a stance/bias - of course it should, one of the failings of the BBC is that it sticks far to heavily on the side of being opinionated. THe problem is, there are plenty of situations where refusing to state an opinion is an endorsement of one position.

 

[Digerati]

I don't agree that a newspaper shouldn't have a stance/bias -

I am just say that stand/stance should be displayed in the editorial pages, not in reporting the news.

THe problem is, there are plenty of situations where refusing to state an opinion is an endorsement of one position.

Not if you have an established reputation of being unbiased. If you reply with "no comment" every time asked your opinion, then no endorsement will be suggested or implied. I contend, when reporting the facts of an event, it is not the job of the reporter to interject his or her personal opinion (or the opinion of the newspaper's publisher). It is their job to report the facts. That's all.

Contrary to what many in the media and political world would like us to believe, the general public, when given all the facts, are fully capable of forming their own opinions and making informed, intelligent decisions on their own.

 

[x BlueRobot]

I'm not totally sure about The Times stance on politics, they've had opinion articles against Conservatives and sometimes against Labour. I tend to ignore the Opinion articles anyway; I like the Letters to the Editor page though.

I buy The Times for the compact size and the puzzle pages. The Telegraph I would only buy if The Times wasn't available. I do read some of the short articles The Guardian posts through their Twitter account.

To be honest, most of the broadsheet papers are right-wing because that's their readership.

 

[Digerati]

To be honest, most of the broadsheet papers are right-wing because that's their readership.

That's probably true because older people tend to be more conservative still read newspapers and younger people don't.