Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1464 times:
I don't think that is too relevant really. Anyone who knows the Gaurdian (sic) knows that it is indeed a top quality newspaper, which does have left leaning opinions. But it is hardly communist, and anyone who has said so has clearly never read it.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
PHX-LJU From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1393 times:
>>Curious, the article does not say who or what organzation bestowed this honor on the Guardian.
Yes it does:
"Guardian Unlimited, the Guardian's website, was named internet site of the year, MediaGuardian.co.uk's Dan Milmo won online journalist of the year, the print edition's front page of September 12 was commended, and Emma Brockes was named feature writer of the year at the British Press Awards, sponsored by Press Gazette."
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1381 times:
Who cares what the Guardian's ideology is, or is perceived to be- it is a paper which generally has some pretty interesting articles-and its website is pretty impressive too-especially the guide to sources of foreign media.
I have to concur with Stretch 8 though, I regard the Economist as pretty much the best summary of the week's events-lots of interesting, informed articles from around the world. It's firmly secular, pro-capitalism and globalization, and backs up its stance with convincing facts and opinion.
If you subscribe to any paper, better go for the Economist (in my opinion, of course).
Regards (and I don't care a stuff for who owns what, or which paper supports which party).