Newspaper readership by political party support (YouGov)

[Merseysider]

And your point is ?, you have managed to highlight 'these totally incorrect and ridiculous figures together', perhaps you would like to point out why these poll figures, which were completely wrong, are not totally incorrect and ridiculous

If you think I'm referring to last nights BBC exit poll figures, the only figures which were accurate, then I won't call you an idiot either

The BBC figures weren't the only ones that suggested SNP would feature prominently, which they did correctly predict.

The final Ipsis-Mori poll got everything right except for SNP: Conservatives in front, Labour trailing, Lib Dems behind UKIP.

The Lord Ashcroft poll would also be spot on if it had deducted 5% from Labour swinging to the SNP.

The ComRes poll for ITV & The Daily Mail put Conservatives on 35%, Labour 33%, UKIP 13%, LibDems 8% and SNP on 5%, which is broadly correct so far.

And the Survation poll for The Mirror put Conservatives on 34%, Labour on 34%, LibDems on 8% and UKIP on 15%, with the SNP on 5%.

I don't think 'completely wrong' is quite accurate.

 

[Amberley54]

I must be one of the few Labour candidates standing tomorrow that occasionally buys the Daily 'hate' Mail.

Take it to laugh at some of the hysterically distorted news items, But mainly for the rather more objective personal health and sports reporting.

The majority shareholder of the publisher of the Mail currently enjoys 'non-dom' status because his grandfather, Lord Rothemere, lived in the UK. The current Rothemere lives in Paris. I wonder how much UK tax he pays on that multi-million £ profit/dividend?

Anyway, off to bed soon. Early start in the morning

By the way I won my contest.

The only seat in Cheshire East to that the Tories lost to Labour, as far as I'm aware.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

By the way I won my contest.

The only seat in Cheshire East to that the Tories lost to Labour, as far as I'm aware.

Obviously you cannot be referring to Macclesfield, as that was one of the five areas of Cheshire East that were held by the Conservatives in the General Election.

Are you referring to the local council seat or the parish council seat in the Macclesfield area? Still, I offer you my congratulations upon your win.

As you are aware, I live in another ward in the Macclesfield area, that of Prestbury, where the local council election result was...

Conservative.....2054

UKIP..................291

Labour...............269

 

[Amberley54]

Obviously you cannot be referring to Macclesfield, as that was one of the five areas of Cheshire East that were held by the Conservatives in the General Election.

Are you referring to the local council seat or the parish council seat in the Macclesfield area? Still, I offer you my congratulations upon your win.

As you are aware, I live in another ward in the Macclesfield area, that of Prestbury, where the local council election result was...

Conservative.....2054

UKIP..................291

Labour...............269

To clarify I was referring to Cheshire East BC - Macclesfield West & Ivy ward.

Prestbury - words 'horse' and blue rosette' comes to mind with regard to elections

 

[edwin_m]

The Torygraph is normally the better for business and money matters and normally outside the editorial pages, the news is given straight, - that is except for the last month. They have consistently converted every bit of news into a 'Labour disaster/Tory our only salvation' story.
The Times is not unlike the Sun in its style, - it's easy to see the Murdoch line almost everywhere, but the english grammar is a bit less TOWIE.
When I've had enough of those two I seek temporary comfort in the Guardian/Observer as only non tabloid-style left of centre paper. Only occasionally, as there is no point in just reinforcing one's own prejudices and as Sun Tzu said, "Know Your Enemy".

I think a quality paper can reflect its political view in the comment pages, as well as those of the named contributors, but the news should be reported straight. As far as I can see all the tabloids totally fail this test. I rarely see the Telegraph but judging by the excerpts on Yahoo it was vehemently anti-Nationalist during the referendum campaign (I say this as someone broadly sharing the same viewpoint to a lesser extent myself, and recognise this could be the selection bias of Yahoo rather than the Telegraph itself).

I think the Guardian, Independent and usually the Times report the news pretty straight, though I haven't seen the Times much during the campaign. In the case of the Guardian the paper's attitude does come out in the selection of feature and sometimes news stories that are printed.

Having seen a mention somewhere that the Independent came out for Cameron I dug out their editorial from just before the election off their website. Having said they weren't going to tell their readers how to vote, they pretty much advocated continuation of the previous coalition with a little more LibDem content. This article attracted over 2000 "strongly disagrees" against around 1000 of all other opinions put together, and to me it has severely damaged the reputation of the paper for a politically neutral stance and for respecting the intelligence of its readership.

 

[Busaholic]

I think a quality paper can reflect its political view in the comment pages, as well as those of the named contributors, but the news should be reported straight. As far as I can see all the tabloids totally fail this test. I rarely see the Telegraph but judging by the excerpts on Yahoo it was vehemently anti-Nationalist during the referendum campaign (I say this as someone broadly sharing the same viewpoint to a lesser extent myself, and recognise this could be the selection bias of Yahoo rather than the Telegraph itself).

I think the Guardian, Independent and usually the Times report the news pretty straight, though I haven't seen the Times much during the campaign. In the case of the Guardian the paper's attitude does come out in the selection of feature and sometimes news stories that are printed.

Having seen a mention somewhere that the Independent came out for Cameron I dug out their editorial from just before the election off their website. Having said they weren't going to tell their readers how to vote, they pretty much advocated continuation of the previous coalition with a little more LibDem content. This article attracted over 2000 "strongly disagrees" against around 1000 of all other opinions put together, and to me it has severely damaged the reputation of the paper for a politically neutral stance and for respecting the intelligence of its readership.

It was interesting that the i not only didn't follow the Independent's line, but made a specific point of stating that it was wrong to advocate voting a particular way! Although they may share the journalists, each has its own editor. I regret the Indy, for perhaps the first time in its history, kowtowing to the financial interests of its owner.