advertisement


Amazing Guardian article

narabdela said:
Factual errors in a "Guardian" article?

Is it trying to emulate the "Daily Mail"? ;)

Amazing!
Click to expand...

Factual errors, illegible charting and childish loaded studenty statements on it. Congrats to the joint worst paper in the UK for upholding their reputation for being completely shit.
 
richgilb said:
Factual errors, illegible charting and childish loaded studenty statements on it. Congrats to the joint worst paper in the UK for upholding their reputation for being completely shit.
Click to expand...

I get the sense that you wouldn't know good journalism if it hit you in the face.
 
richgilb said:
Factual errors, illegible charting and childish loaded studenty statements on it. Congrats to the joint worst paper in the UK for upholding their reputation for being completely shit.
Click to expand...
I'm happy to cut them some slack due to their efforts on difficult journalism like Edward Snowden.
 
richgilb said:
Why's that, then?
Click to expand...

Because the guardian has some excellent journalists who have recently exposed phone hacking, and have been working to release the Snowden leaks to name but two. Or would you rather they hadn't bothered?
 
Anex said:
Because the guardian has some excellent journalists who have recently exposed phone hacking, and have been working to release the Snowden leaks to name but two. Or would you rather they hadn't bothered?
Click to expand...

Phone hacking to me was leaking from various sources at the same time, one of which was the Queen ringing the police about it years ago. What makes you think The Guardian was blazing the trail here? Wasn't there a New York paper on this years ago too?

This aside, it is not realistic to expect people to trust a paper for a couple of decent projects when the majority of the work is poor, eg that pathetic chart above.
 
richgilb said:
Phone hacking to me was leaking from various sources at the same time, one of which was the Queen ringing the police about it years ago. What makes you think The Guardian was blazing the trail here? Wasn't there a New York paper on this years ago too?

This aside, it is not realistic to expect people to trust a paper for a couple of decent projects when the majority of the work is poor, eg that pathetic chart above.
Click to expand...

What unlike the mail, sun, mirror, times etc?

mat
 
The Guardian is a poor newspaper with generally poor, sensationalist and technically ignorant journalism. If you want to know about the Snowden disclosure then the US papers seem a better bet, and the links aggregated by Bruce Schneier in some of his blog are a good place to start.

https://www.schneier.com/

Paul
 
I don't agree with the Guardian's editorial stance on many things, but it is usually very good in the way it presents complex statistical data, much better than the competition -with the exception perhaps of the FT - and I often buy it for that reason alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top