Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
The Mail Online is a hilarious website. "Disgusted Of Tonbridge" would be at home with it.
Would this be any relation to the famous "twin set and pearls" harridan who goes by the nom de plume of "Offended of Orpington".
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The Guardian
- Thread starter Ferret
- Start date
- Status
Would this be any relation to the famous "twin set and pearls" harridan who goes by the nom de plume of "Offended of Orpington".
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
You'll have to remind me where I said I read The Guardian regularly. Of course you'll not find it as I didn't say it. Also define 'infrequent' and 'odd time'. I probably find a copy of The Sun once per week, perhaps more on a train journey, and I read The Guardian less often than I do The Sun. And yes I still think The Sun is a load of crap, and I would much rather read The Guardian but it seems that people who buy The Sun are more likely to leave it on a train (perhaps a judgement of how low quality it is?).
Ivo
Established Member
It's also a lot cheaper though so leaving it on a train is the equivalent of a X00% saving over doing the same with any half-decent paper. As much as I hate to admit it, if commuters wanted something to read on the train and can't find a Metro/ES, a cheap option would be Murdoch's red top rubbish
SS4
Established Member
It's also a lot cheaper though so leaving it on a train is the equivalent of a X00% saving over doing the same with any half-decent paper. As much as I hate to admit it, if commuters wanted something to read on the train and can't find a Metro/ES, a cheap option would be Murdoch's red top rubbish
The book I've borrowed from the library about the battle of the Somme would be more up to date with news than Murdoch's rubbish
Those are stripped from the final circulation figures - the gross figures are given first, before the bulk figures are stripped away to reveal the net 'paid-for' final count.
In the previous set of circulation figures, The Times and Sun got a warning from the relevant Office for 'failing' to properly inform the Office of their true 'bulk' figures, thus distorting their real circulation figures and giving a false change in readership. The timing, and coincidence of NewsCorp AGM and shareholders report, is of course completely accidental.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It's the first news outlet to outline its plan for a 'digital age' - the company have pretty much accepted that one day they will not be printing, and will be issuing their news via digital means instead. I don't call it drastic action - I call it 'everything going to plan' and being spun by the Sun on behalf of NewsCorp as bad news.
It's a complete non-story.
As a side note, the Scott Trust (who own the Guardian Media Group) have frequently stated that they are prepared to lose money to remain a high quality outlet of journalism, although the transition to the 'digital age outlet' should see it cut its losses. It has no desire for the Guardian to actually turn a profit, just cover its costs.
Of note, The Guardian has the highest online readership after the MailOnline, is the most transparent newspaper written in English and is lobbying for it to become industry standard for articles with any scientific basis and has won various accolades and praise for its transition to the digital edition.
Even without any preference in readership, I would find it difficult to name another media group or organisation with such non-vested interest in self serving, or with such an exceptionally clean record when it comes to unethical practices of its journalists or owning group (the kerfuffle with the Fund tax arrangements excluded, which even then didn't involve the media arm at all).
Last edited:
Ivo
Established Member
What isn't in the red tops...? :roll:
It's also a lot cheaper though so leaving it on a train is the equivalent of a X00% saving over doing the same with any half-decent paper. As much as I hate to admit it, if commuters wanted something to read on the train and can't find a Metro/ES, a cheap option would be Murdoch's red top rubbish
It used to be cheap, 20p IIRC, but had a look this morning and it is 40p. By contrast, The Mirror is 45p and the i is 20p.
Stephen55a1960
Member
Not quite but my thanks to Bungle 73 who has corrected me(see below). "Offended Of Orpington" and "Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells" are indeed related
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Yes of course it is. Apologies for the inaccuracy and any embarassment so caused
!
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I am pleased to see that such admonishments do indeed still take place these days. Thank you for making this point in your posting.
OuterDistant
Member
As an aside, would anyone on here admit to reading the Express? FWIW, my impression of them is that they are unable to leave their homes, cowering in fear of imaginary threats.
Schnellzug
Established Member
The basic problem with the world of British journalism is that they always feel that they have to have allegiance to one or other of the political Parties, and that makes everything so boringly predictable, because you know exactly what angle they'll take on any issue, and anything just turns into a half-hearted throwing things at the "other lot" just because they feel that that's what they have to do. It would be nice to think that the decline in newspaper sales is a sign that people are getting fed up with it, just as the decline in the numbers who turn out to vote for one of other of the usual lot might also be a sympton that people are getting fed up with the two-party hegemony.
* insert Sid James snigger here
Don't forget "Gays ramming it down our throats"*
* insert Sid James snigger here
Butts
Veteran Member
"It is are you.........."
I read The Independent which claims the above, however there is no doubt it leans towards the left but not slavishly though.
My subscription costs £5 per week against a cover value £9.60 which shows the desperation in clinging onto circulation made by todays publications.
One aspect I do mourn is the "shrinkage" of the quality press whether it be to the Berliner (Guardian format) or tabloid size. Only The Telegraph, FT, ST and Herald up here retain full broadsheet format.
East Coast are now giving away The Times and as mentioned Virgin The Guardian and FT, both used to feature The Independent.
However I will read any newspaper left behind whatever its political orientation
I read The Independent which claims the above, however there is no doubt it leans towards the left but not slavishly though.
My subscription costs £5 per week against a cover value £9.60 which shows the desperation in clinging onto circulation made by todays publications.
One aspect I do mourn is the "shrinkage" of the quality press whether it be to the Berliner (Guardian format) or tabloid size. Only The Telegraph, FT, ST and Herald up here retain full broadsheet format.
East Coast are now giving away The Times and as mentioned Virgin The Guardian and FT, both used to feature The Independent.
However I will read any newspaper left behind whatever its political orientation
I don't think they've used that slogan for years, have they?
I don't think the physical size matters, as long as the quality of the journalism remains the same. Those old broadsheet formats were too be big to be practical really.I read The Independent which claims the above, however there is no doubt it leans towards the left but not slavishly though.
My subscription costs £5 per week against a cover value £9.60 which shows the desperation in clinging onto circulation made by todays publications.
One aspect I do mourn is the "shrinkage" of the quality press whether it be to the Berliner (Guardian format) or tabloid size. Only The Telegraph, FT, ST and Herald up here retain full broadsheet format.
East Coast are now giving away The Times and as mentioned Virgin The Guardian and FT, both used to feature The Independent.
However I will read any newspaper left behind whatever its political orientation
I pay about £4 (but it's due to go up next year) per week for my Times subscription. That includes The Times and Sunday Times iPad apps (the papers and supplements in app form, plus additional extras), the iPhone app, website access and Times+ membership.
You can get vouchers for the physical papers on Saturday and Sunday as well for the same price
You can get vouchers for the physical papers on Saturday and Sunday as well for the same price
Vouchers? But that means traipsing to the shop. I'm not even sure they do The Times at our nearest convenience store. I'd rather have the apps - more convenient - plus you get extras (videos, interactive graphics etc.).
Throw the vouchers in the bin if you want, you still get the exact same digital access with the Weekend Pack for the exact same price and can use the voucher every once in a while (or just hand them in to your newsagent if you have a local friendly one so that he can claim back the value).
Drsatan
Established Member
The only time I've ever bought copies of the Sun was 6 years ago, solely for the holiday vouchers!
Typically, I'd cut the holiday vouchers out, glance through the rest of the paper, and chuck it in the recycling bin. Still, it meant I could spend a pleasant few days with the parents in a mobile home on the Isle of Wight!
Typically, I'd cut the holiday vouchers out, glance through the rest of the paper, and chuck it in the recycling bin. Still, it meant I could spend a pleasant few days with the parents in a mobile home on the Isle of Wight!
- Status