Guardian admits it will not allow readers to criticise its journalists

The Guardian has become one of the most exploitative British newspapers, despite its Liberal political stance. Private Eye has repeatedly criticised the Groaniad for its extensive use of interns to provide cheap labour in filling its columns. Furthermore, its Liberal stance has not prevented it from running puff pieces promoting extremely autocratic and repressive governments, such as that of Indonesia. Nor did it have any qualms about running similar pieces advertising the virtues of big, multinational companies responsible for wrecking the environment and brutalising indigenous populations.

According to this fortnight’s Private Eye (28th November – 11th December 2014), the newspaper’s editor, Ian Rusbridger, has also decided to cut the ‘Society’ section from its website. ‘Society’ was one of the few pieces of the newspaper still bringing in advertising revenue from adverts for public sector jobs. ‘Society’ was, of course, the section that dealt with the problems, as the Eye points out, of ‘old, poor or disabled people’. The Eye’s piece on the removal of that section concludes with the paragraph
‘Removal of the web version of Society means the Guardian’s freeloading global audience will have to search long and hard to find anything about real life in the UK, as distinct from breaking news from hipster cafes in Shoreditch. As for the council, NHS and charity workers who make up the core of those still buying the paper out of some sense of tribal loyalty, the message is clear.’

All, or most of the newspapers, promote their star journalists. Looking at the posters for the Cheltenham literary festival back in the first weeks of October, I was struck by those from the Times, which sponsors the festival. These featured their star columnists, like Caitlin Moran. Now with paid staff being savagely cut by the newspapers to save money, and their places filled with interns, who are frankly exploited, I wonder who the unsung, uncredited ‘little’ people are, who work so hard to make the big columnists look good.

Pride's Purge

(not satire – it’s the UK press)

In an extraordinary article today – the Guardian’s so-called ‘reader editor’ Stephen Pritchard admits the newspaper will delete any readers’ comments which “persistently” criticise its journalists.

Pritchard rounds off his extremely defensive piece with this extraordinary sentence:

….while we acknowledge criticism of the articles we publish, we will not allow persistent misrepresentation of our journalists.”

In other words, for “persistent misrepresentation” read “criticism“‘

Which at least explains why for several years now I have been banned (not pre-moderated – banned) from commenting on the Guardian website and my polite enquiries as to why I have been banned have been consistently ignored:

guardian commentsd

So now I know.

Because while I don’t use degrading, sexist or racist language, I do take a pretty persistent line in criticism of journalists from all mainstream newspapers- including the Guardian:

Guardian claims Lib Dem MPs opposed…

View original post 232 more words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: