The Guardian has an agenda, and they routinely misinterpret things to sell news.
They're the "daily mail" of the left. Happily, judging by their circulation figures, they won't be around too much longer.
They're the "daily mail" of the left. Happily, judging by their circulation figures, they won't be around too much longer.
I've given up reading the news in the UK. It's either biased towards the agenda of the paper or terribly depressing. Both unfortunately sell very well. I've even got rid of my television. Life is good.
In any case, I don't know how feasible it is to have a "non-biased" newspaper that pushes actual journalism.
It probably isn't. I was hoping WikiNews would end up being that to be honest.
Makes 'phone hacking' seem lame in comparison.
They happily make millions of pounds of losses each year, and are bankrolled by people who seem to not mind.
They are not driven by profit, they're driven by a moral crusade (A mistaken one IMHO, but still).
Losses after losses... at some point, something's gotta give.
"Funded by a trust" isn't some magic get out of jail free card.
Circulation figures for other newspapers are doing pretty well actually. Print still has a long life ahead.