"Rag" has been used to describe this newspaper with heritage.

[SydneyRover]

This long read about The Guardian and what it stands for explains why you may not fully understand it. Read it all it may change your mind.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/16/a-mission-for-journalism-in-a-time-of-crisis

[Dutch Uncle]

Thanks for putting that up Sydney - I found it a very worthy article, and the clear hope is that the Guardian and other media outlets can live up to those principles and ideals. To do that they need to embrace those ideals at all levels starting at the top. That puts the Guardian in a better place than many, but is not in itself a guarantee of success. IMHO it is a critical battlefield of the 21st century- I am despairing of having to guess what is true these days.

[SydneyRover]

Thanks for putting that up Sydney - I found it a very worthy article, and the clear hope is that the Guardian and other media outlets can live up to those principles and ideals. To do that they need to embrace those ideals at all levels starting at the top. That puts the Guardian in a better place than many, but is not in itself a guarantee of success. IMHO it is a critical battlefield of the 21st century- I am despairing of having to guess what is true these days.

Thanks DU, just a note The Guardian noted a couple of weeks ago the it was now receiving more money from supporters than from advertising strengthening its position which in a digital world is truly amazing. The post has had 135 views so far and my hope is that at least some of them have read the whole article as a reminder of how important it is to have a truly independent media free from political interference. If the media is not free and independent it's just propaganda.

https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2017/oct/26/together-we-are-safeguarding-the-guardians-independent-journalism

[Glyn_Wigley]

It's not political interference that's the problem with newspapers in this country, it's the owners' telling the editors what propaganda angle to push. Apart from the Telegraph, whose main priority at the moment seems to be not to publish anything that would even slightly embarrass anyone who buys advertising from them.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Re: Telegraph

I disagree with Peter Oborne on just about everything but I've always respected him. He argues from an intellectual right wing position which is rare these days. And he cares about standards and the importance of society, even if I think his solutions are wrong.

This is what he says about his time at the Telegraph.

 https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph

[SydneyRover]

Re: Telegraph

I disagree with Peter Oborne on just about everything but I've always respected him. He argues from an intellectual right wing position which is rare these days. And he cares about standards and the importance of society, even if I think his solutions are wrong.

This is what he says about his time at the Telegraph.

 https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph

Agreed BST The standards he cares about are total independence of media outlets to publish without fear or favour admirable indeed. A very minor nit-pick when he related that half the sub editors had been fired he used "decimated" which is only one in ten, but decimated is widely used to describe disasters,

[Dutch Uncle]

Re: Telegraph

I disagree with Peter Oborne on just about everything but I've always respected him. He argues from an intellectual right wing position which is rare these days. And he cares about standards and the importance of society, even if I think his solutions are wrong.

This is what he says about his time at the Telegraph.

 https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph

Agreed BST The standards he cares about are total independence of media outlets to publish without fear or favour admirable indeed. A very minor nit-pick when he related that half the sub editors had been fired he used "decimated" which is only one in ten, but decimated is widely used to describe disasters

I always thought decimated meant reduced by a factor of 10, i.e. only 10% left. Agree wholeheartedly that it is used wrongly far too often.

Edit: Apologies Sydney, I now see that it is indeed 1 in 10, a Roman punishment. I have spent a lifetime using it wrongy myself 

[hoolahoop]

This long read about The Guardian and what it stands for explains why you may not fully understand it. Read it all it may change your mind.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/16/a-mission-for-journalism-in-a-time-of-crisis

Thanks from me too, The Grauniad is a fine paper.  Some Brexiters would benefit from the articles especially about the way this country is going to struggle now because of Brexit .