A media outlet of exellence, compare it to what you read.

[SydneyRover]

The Guardian is not the only paper I read but as with many I have limited time and so I tend to go to sources with proven credibility.

https://www.theguardian.com/gnm-press-office/awards

[albie]

All the main media outlets are compromised to some extent.
The key is to be aware of the constraints on the edit at any publication.

As far as the Guardian is concerned, this twitter link is interesting:
https://twitter.com/DCKennard/status/1138493594728304640

It does not mean there are no articles of interest, but those topics chosen for coverage might be limited.
Freedom of the press....it would be good!

[SydneyRover]

All the main media outlets are compromised to some extent.
The key is to be aware of the constraints on the edit at any publication.

As far as the Guardian is concerned, this twitter link is interesting:
https://twitter.com/DCKennard/status/1138493594728304640

It does not mean there are no articles of interest, but those topics chosen for coverage might be limited.
Freedom of the press....it would be good!

No sure what the tweet is getting at but I would think being on the committee is keeping in the loop, I will try and check.

Fortunately the Guardian os owned and run by a trust and is not answerable to any one person, it also has a pretty healthy editorial code.

https://uploads.guim.co.uk/2018/10/20/273521476.pdf

[albie]

The point is that all journalism involves the selective use of sources on a reciprocal exchange basis.

Sometimes publishing a story in the interest of a particular contact puts a favour in the bank for early access to future information. Likewise, not publishing, or publishing a restricted version, is a way of directing the media focus in interpreting a particular event.

It is usually the back story not fully explained where the real interest lies.
Some journos make a good career out of mining this seam, including some at the Guardian, like Luke Harding.

The Guardian is good for football, btw. David Conn is a fine writer.

[Axholme Lion]

It's ok if you like left wing, anti British, anti Christian tripe written by Champagne Socialists from Islington called Tarquin or Jemima who have never done a proper days work in their life.

[SydneyRover]

The point is that all journalism involves the selective use of sources on a reciprocal exchange basis.

Sometimes publishing a story in the interest of a particular contact puts a favour in the bank for early access to future information. Likewise, not publishing, or publishing a restricted version, is a way of directing the media focus in interpreting a particular event.

It is usually the back story not fully explained where the real interest lies.
Some journos make a good career out of mining this seam, including some at the Guardian, like Luke Harding.

The Guardian is good for football, btw. David Conn is a fine writer.

Thanks Albie, apologies I think we're on slightly diverging tracks, I was wondering why Matt Kennard posted the tweet, it appears he's suggesting that the Guardian esp' Paul Johnson by cooperating and or being part of the D-Notice committee would be in some way compromised from reporting information that came his way (not from the committee) I think the Guardian over the years has shown in it's exposes that it will not be stood over.

[wilts rover]

What I believe Albie is getting at Sydney is that in certain left-wing circles The Guardian is known as the MI6 House Journal. In that it has strong 'connections' with that organisation.

For example it gave strong support to Rory Stewart (alleged former MI6 agent) in a way that no other newspaper did.

More telling for me is the coverage it gave to the 'alleged' chemical attack in Douma, which again it covered widely. It also covered the release of the offical OPCW report into the attack that concluded there was evidence of chlorine in the area.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/02/chlorine-was-used-in-attack-on-syrian-rebel-town-of-douma-watchdog-says

However it did not carry the story that the inspectors concluded the chlorine cylinders were unlikely to have come from an aircraft but were more likely placed there manually - and this was then left out of the final report. Luckily The Independent did.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/douma-syria-opcw-chemical-weapons-chlorine-gas-video-conspiracy-theory-russia-a8927116.html

There is even a web site Off-Guardian dedicated to the news The Guardian won't cover
https://off-guardian.org/2019/05/16/update-opcw-confirm-leaked-report-is-genuine/

Here's a good spot of reading for you - and any one else really interested in which news stories get into our newspapers
http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/20272/1/From%20silence%20to%20primary%20definer.pdf

[Glyn_Wigley]

It's ok if you like left wing, anti British, anti Christian tripe written by Champagne Socialists from Islington called Tarquin or Jemima who have never done a proper days work in their life.

You must be a regular reader to know so much about them.

[SydneyRover]

What I believe Albie is getting at Sydney is that in certain left-wing circles The Guardian is known as the MI6 House Journal. In that it has strong 'connections' with that organisation.

For example it gave strong support to Rory Stewart (alleged former MI6 agent) in a way that no other newspaper did.

More telling for me is the coverage it gave to the 'alleged' chemical attack in Douma, which again it covered widely. It also covered the release of the offical OPCW report into the attack that concluded there was evidence of chlorine in the area.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/02/chlorine-was-used-in-attack-on-syrian-rebel-town-of-douma-watchdog-says

However it did not carry the story that the inspectors concluded the chlorine cylinders were unlikely to have come from an aircraft but were more likely placed there manually - and this was then left out of the final report. Luckily The Independent did.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/douma-syria-opcw-chemical-weapons-chlorine-gas-video-conspiracy-theory-russia-a8927116.html

There is even a web site Off-Guardian dedicated to the news The Guardian won't cover
https://off-guardian.org/2019/05/16/update-opcw-confirm-leaked-report-is-genuine/

Here's a good spot of reading for you - and any one else really interested in which news stories get into our newspapers
http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/20272/1/From%20silence%20to%20primary%20definer.pdf

Thanks Wilts, I did follow this at the time, but I cannot recall reading any of the other articles you supplied, I already pay for one media subscription and a lot of others including the Independent is pay for play. "The report will now go to the UN security council" so a final report is/should be pending, the Guardian has played a reasonably straight bat and reported the facts as known at the time, the Guardian report pre-dates The Independent report by about 3 weeks so dissenting report was not known?? (maybe) I cannot find any Guardian articles on the dissenting report so it will be interesting to read the  report when released from the security council.

Edit: As you pointed out the Guardian has not reported on the leaked report from the OPCW, there is a question over access to the site of the incident which I do recall at the time where, no one appears to address this adequately, time enough for many things to happen. Am I correct that there is a final report due from the UN?

[jonnydog]

You can’t fault The Metro. Quality paper 👍🏻

[Axholme Lion]

It's ok if you like left wing, anti British, anti Christian tripe written by Champagne Socialists from Islington called Tarquin or Jemima who have never done a proper days work in their life.

You must be a regular reader to know so much about them.

I like to keep up to date with the latest propaganda.
For real news I prefer RT.

[Not Now Kato]

It's ok if you like left wing, anti British, anti Christian tripe written by Champagne Socialists from Islington called Tarquin or Jemima who have never done a proper days work in their life.

You must be a regular reader to know so much about them.

I like to keep up to date with the latest propaganda.
For real news I prefer RT.

You read the Radio Times AL?  No wonder you make such daft posts! 

[bobjimwilly]

It's ok if you like left wing, anti British, anti Christian tripe written by Champagne Socialists from Islington called Tarquin or Jemima who have never done a proper days work in their life.

You must be a regular reader to know so much about them.

I like to keep up to date with the latest propaganda.
For real news I prefer RT.

So, you're either a WUM or a muppet; which one is it?

[wilts rover]

I notice today, when the Guardian carried an advert attacking Jeremy Corbyn, they refused to publish a cartoon that made fun of Tom Watson. This is after removing a letter in support of Corbyn from 100 'influential' Jews. Wrong kind of news.

https://twitter.com/Jonathan_K_Cook/status/1151493738423889923

[SydneyRover]

I notice today, when the Guardian carried an advert attacking Jeremy Corbyn, they refused to publish a cartoon that made fun of Tom Watson. This is after removing a letter in support of Corbyn from 100 'influential' Jews. Wrong kind of news.

https://twitter.com/Jonathan_K_Cook/status/1151493738423889923

It's an odd position for the guardian to put themselves into and a test of their editorial freedom I put a comment in btl the other day saying that I thought there was antisemites in all parties but there were some that were all too quick to call those out that condemn Israel for its treatment of Palestinians as antisemitic. I think/hope that we'll hear more about this (the guardians position) thanks Wilts. I don't get all the news here of course and I see little or none UK TV so I miss a lot of good political debate.