All news reporting is biased.
Once a newspaper selects some facts, chooses certain kinds of headlines and where to place them, it is making a slew of judgements. It is impossible for a newspaper to avoid judgements. The Daily Mail etc are obviously biased – while others live in denial. The most self congratulatory and defensive delusions about ‘balanced’ reporting come via The Guardian.
‘Readers Editor’ Chris Elliot published a jaw dropping piece defending Guardian coverage of Jeremy Corbyn- his technique was illuminating!
Chris selected some articles, made judgements about their ‘balance’, ignored articles about other contenders, referenced some Guardian commissioned polls and concluded that his employers were doing great!
In his analysis he acknowledges that his views are subjective, that he lacks the resources to do a proper analysis but offers them anyway.
Poor Chris cannot see that EVERYTHING The Guardian publishes is subjective and suffers from the malaises of churnalism, neoliberal ownership, few resources and a chronic lack of time.
The Guardian / Observer view of Jeremy Corbyn is clearly stated in its editorials here and here :
The Guardian then slants its coverage to support these views but maintains its faux journalistic ‘balance’ behind a series of con tricks.
(1) Look everyone says wot we say…
.
Get someone to parrot The Guardian’s editorial and pretend that reporting on it is journalism. If the comments were made elsewhere in the corporate media they can be passed off as factual reporting.
In the case of Jeremy Corbyn, The Guardian has dragged out as many moribund Labour politicos as it can to warn about / rubbish / patronise and smear Corbyn – Tony Blair, Neil Kinnock, Lord Mandelson, Alan Johnson to name but a few.
What you end up with are articles, ‘reports’ and ‘live blogs’ about people who reflect back The Guardian’s view almost exclusively.
.
(2) We pay – they say…
.
Salaried Guardian hacks know of their employers opinions and exercise full anticipatory compliance.
In the interests of ‘balance’ a few opposing views are commissioned too – but there is a heavy slant of articles in favour of the established editorial line. This reinforces the fiction that The Guardian inhabits and reflects a ‘centre ground’, when in reality it mirrors only its own prejudices.
Polly Toynbee, Andrew Rawnsley, Martin Kettle, Michael White all owe their positions to their adherence to the status quo.
.
(3) The Enid Blyton effect
.
In Enid Blyton books, rich kids from private schools chuckled happily and had nice middle class names – while working class kids sniggered and had evil gypsy parents called Mr & Mrs Stick.
Yvette Cooper is the Guardian horse in the Labour leadership race and hence they printed a front page article extolling her virtues alongside nice pictures of her chuckling happily.
and they had this terribly balanced summary of her career:
‘Hers is a life and political career punctuated by firsts – a first in PPE at Oxford, the first female minister to take maternity leave, the first female treasury chief secretary, and now the ambition is to be the first female Labour leader and first Labour female prime minister.’
This kind of toadying is usually reserved for the royals…
Jeremy Corbyn on the other hand occupies the dirty gypsy slot and of course the role of red menace. Apparently he wears socks and sandals to work (oh dear LORD!) and this shot gives you the idea…
.
(4) Look the other way.
.
Provide coverage and analysis of views and theories that fall within an acceptable range. So tax campaigner Richard J. Murphy who is central to Corby’s economic vision is ignored totally. Readers of their dire Live Blogs on economic matters can’t fail to notice how virtually no heterodox economic opinions are ever included – to The Guardian they simply don’t exist.
By ignoring opposing views The Guardian thus defines the ‘credible’ and very narrow boundaries within which debate can take place.
.
(5) Damned with faint praise
.
Lists the good qualities of an opponent in a way which leaves you in no doubt that this person is not to be taken seriously.
The Guardian noted patronisingly that Corbyn had brought ‘excitement’ to the campaign and was popular with the young people…. you could never accuse The Guardian of being subtle.
.
We have no reason to be grateful for The Guardian
People still accept the flat earth notion of ‘balanced’ newspapers and that we should be grateful for their existence.
The Guardian is a business, governed by people drawn from the financial elites. Their bias is pro-corporate, neoliberal and conservative. Debate is restricted to a very narrow range of ‘credible’ options and everything else is rubbished or ignored.
Lets abandon The Guardian to those hopping over from The Daily Mail.
We need a vibrant independent media that is free of neoliberal vested interest.
The Guardian isn’t that, it serves the interests of corporate power.
see also: Corbyn leadership rivals issue statement – vote for us and we’ll make you pay!
see also: Follow Sodium Haze on Facebook
The Guardian has been galloping to the right in recent days,and this article is a useful tool in exposing it.
Years ago I was fortunate enough to read The Lanny Budd seriers of books, written by a well known American Socialist called Upton sinclair, covering the period between 1913 and about 1946. These books contained the names of many persons of influence who can be found in our history books. I was able to see very clearly the malign influence of the Press and the Very Wealthy and the corrupt politicians of the day. the story of their lives is in the history of this country and is still corrupting us now.
Being of a cynical turn of mind I dont think they would change their minds or their tactics as they have proved so successful so far.
The most obvious example is the way Greece has been destroyed for daring to say NO.
Since reading those books I have never trusted Politicians or thw Press and through circumstances not of my devising I have not watched television for 40 years. Glad I am not polluted to much!
“and now [Yvette Cooper’s] ambition is to be the first female Labour leader” – How heroic. Go, Yvette. Rah, rah, rah.
Wonder how Margaret Beckett feels about that ambition? Or is she to be Trotskyised out of party history? Maybe she doesn’t count because she’s, y’know, a woman. Or maybe it’s the caravans, as dubious in their own way as Corbyn’s sandals.
And as for Harriet Harman… oh, who gives a toss?
The Guardian’s Threads are also being purged of longstanding commenters and contributors. It is rarely possible to comment on stories involving Israel and those stories regarding Putin or the Ukraine are strenuously censored. “Comment is free” has become a joke as, one by one, people in the Guardian “Community” have been disappeared from the Guardian’s Threads.
In my own case, after two years of substantial contributions to the Guardian’s Threads on various subjects, including but not limited to: poetry, music, history, travel, politics, government, whistleblowing, the Confederate Flag, gun control, police brutality, Europe and the Ukraine, I was unceremoniously dumped from their threads for a one line sarcastic comment about Shaun Walker—their anti-Putin, pro-Azov Battalion hack in the Ukraine.
I suppose I could have asked to be reinstated with the promise that I would be a good boy—at least that is what their “standards” noted, when I clicked on the link provided in regard to my banishment. However, it’s just not worth it anymore. The paper has gone steadily downhill since the departure of Greenwald, the forced destruction of their Snowden Discs and the not-so-subtle changes in their editorial positions—as noted in this article and others around the net.
Like Salon in the US, the Guardian has now been fully absorbed by the powers-that-be. How sad.
I’m another who no longer comments on the Graun. They put me into ‘pre-moderation’ for reasons I am not party to, and at that point I stopped posting.
I am constantly amazed at the vile,insulting, misogynist,and racist comments that they allow to stand, while I have never posted anything like some of the bile on there, and yet have effectively been shunted off. I too have noticed that many long-term contributors seem to have disappeared.