Very interesting, especially compared with last month's revelations regarding the Chancellor & his father in law: Osborne accused over gas lobbyist father-in-law - UK Politics - UK - The Independent Is George Osborne's energy stance influenced by Lord Howell, Greenpeace asks - Telegraph Perhaps the common thread is that of politicians seeking to line their own pockets as well as those of their friends & families? Steal a little and they throw you in jail Steal a lot and they make you king Bob Dylan
When I was a student, I went on a monster CND rally in London. Forget how many hundreds of thousands there were (it was about 1982 or something). I joined the march at the Embankment. It was meant to go on a route for a few miles and end in Hyde Park. It was so big that about 2 hours after it was due to start, we hadn't even moved. Finally I went straight to the rally (as the front of the march had already got there and was being addressed by "luminaries" inc. Neil Kinnock. There were about 10 anarchists with black flags there. Next day I read the Torygraph write-up. They failed to mention the countless coachloads of marchers who had come from all over the country, giving up their Saturday. They divided the official figure of those present by about 5. They spend one paragraph talking about the anarchists - implying that the people present were all crypto anarchic pinkos. They spent one paragraph talking about Lady Olga Maitland and some other horsey women who had apparently heckled the march from some balcony on the route. And they spent about a paragraph saying the Kinnock was a prat. I think that was the penny-dropping moment when I realised, because I had lived it, that the papers don't report news. They just twist facts to suit some agenda they have. The Grauniad does the same thing with endless double page spreads full of social workers and people from Sierra Leone saying how brilliant their rat-filled estate is when it has been decided to demolish it. I've pretty much given up reading papers. Novels are far more truthful.
I think you`ll find its Gruaniad. Nothing compares to the Daily Mail though. I sometimes glance at it and am horrified at the vitriolic bile they come out with.
Glid, you know the research shows we stay in our comfort zones and read the papers that back up our beliefs rather than try something that might challenge them. I dont buy papers anymore but often look online at the left and right papers but unless you were there or have inside info how can you tell what is right?
You can't. But once you have established that someone is a lier, you no longer believe anything they say, whether it is true or not. If I buy a paper, it tends to be the Independent, as it seems to have less of an agenda than any of the others. But as i say, it's for entertainment value only. Pre- Murdoch, the Times was the one to get, but once it had changed into a tabloid piece of bog paper with Murdoch manipulating it, it was suddenly no better than the Sun.
I used to get the Independent but it is a shadow of what it was. Couldnt agree more about the Times or anything else from the Murdoch empire. Interesting point about liars, not everything they say is untrue, bit like the stopped clock still being right twice a day.
Kind of still like the idea of the Times, but it went downhill a long time ago. I got it on and off for probably 20 years, but since they put the website behind the paywall, I can't be arced.
Agree. I read The Times fairly consistently for 50 years, but very rarely now. From being a reliable newspaper of record, it has gradually descended to a tabloid and given up its authority. It just relentlessly pushes the Murdoch line, rabidly anti-European etc. A real bore nowadays, and not worth £1 per day. The nearest equivalent to what The Times used to be is the BBC.
