What are the better UK newspapers??

The following item indicates that the UK newspapers are
now doing a better job than the now terrorized American press.

But what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do
our UK readers recommend? Are they usually available
on the continent??

Being exposed to a different English language press
is possibly a broadening experience for traveling
Americans.

Earl

****



'Downing Street Memo' Gets Fresh Attention
****By Mark Memmott
****USA Today

****Wednesday 08 June 2005

****A simmering controversy over whether American media have ignored a
secret British memo about how President Bush built his case for war with
Iraq bubbled over into the White House on Tuesday.

****At a late afternoon news conference, Reuters correspondent Steve Holland
asked Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair about a memo that's been
widely written about and discussed in Europe but less so in the USA.

****It was the most attention paid by the media in the USA so far to the
"Downing Street memo," first reported on May 1 by The Sunday Times of
London. The memo is said by some of the president's sharpest critics, such
as Democratic Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, to
be strong evidence that Bush decided to go to war and then looked for
evidence to support his decision.

****The Sunday Times said the memo is the minutes of a meeting that British
Prime Minister Tony Blair had with some of his top intelligence and
foreign policy aides on July 23, 2002, at 10 Downing Street, the prime
minister's official residence. The story said the memo indicates that
Blair was told by the head of Britain's MI6 intelligence service that in
2002, the Bush administration was selectively choosing evidence that
supported its case for going to war and ignoring anything to the contrary.
The war began in March 2003.

****"Intelligence and facts were being fixed" by the Bush administration
"around" a policy that saw military action "as inevitable," the newspaper
quoted from the memo.

****"There's nothing farther from the truth," Bush told reporters as
Blair stood at his side. "Both of us didn't want to use our military,"
Bush said in response to a question about the memo. "It was our last
option."

****Blair added, "The facts were not being 'fixed' in any shape or form at
all."

****Bush said that at the time the memo was written, no decision had been
made about going to war. He pointed out that it was written two months
before he went to the United Nations and asked for a Security Council
resolution calling on Saddam Hussein to give up his weapons of mass
destruction or face "serious consequences."

****The Sunday Times' May 1 memo story, which broke just four days before
Britain's national elections, caused a sensation in Europe. American media
reacted more cautiously. The New York Times wrote about the memo May 2,
but didn't mention until its 15th paragraph that the memo stated U.S.
officials had "fixed" intelligence and facts.

****Knight Ridder Newspapers distributed a story May 6 that said the memo
"claims President Bush ... was determined to ensure that U.S. intelligence
data supported his policy." The Los Angeles Times wrote about the memo May
12, The Washington Post followed on May 15 and The New York Times
revisited the news on May 20.

****None of the stories appeared on the newspapers' front pages. Several
other major media outlets, including the evening news programs on ABC, CBS
and NBC, had not said a word about the document before Tuesday. Today
marks USA TODAY's first mention.

****Some activists who opposed Bush's decision to attack Iraq have been
peppering editors with letters and e-mails to push the media into more
aggressive coverage. Last week, a group known as Democrats.com offered
$1,000 to anyone who can get Bush to answer "yes or no" to this question:
Did he or his administration "fix the intelligence" about Iraq's weapons
of mass destruction and alleged ties to terrorism?

****"We want what the Michael Jackson, Paris Hilton and Star Wars stories
have gotten: endless repetition until people have heard about it," says
David Swanson, one of Democrats.com's organizers.

****Robin Niblett of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a
Washington think tank, says it would be easy for Americans to
misunderstand the reference to intelligence being "fixed around" Iraq
policy. " 'Fixed around' in British English means 'bolted on' rather than
altered to fit the policy," he says.

****Ombudsmen at both The New York Times and The Washington Post have been
critical of their newspapers for not covering the story more aggressively.

****USA TODAY chose not to publish anything about the memo before today for
several reasons, says Jim Cox, the newspaper's senior assignment editor
for foreign news. "We could not obtain the memo or a copy of it from a
reliable source," Cox says. "There was no explicit confirmation of its
authenticity from (Blair's office). And it was disclosed four days before
the British elections, raising concerns about the timing."

**-------

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 17:12:23 +0200, Earl Evleth
wrote:

But what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do
our UK readers recommend? Are they usually available
on the continent??

The Sun, the Star, the Mirror, the Mail are all absolute crap, in fact
almost all the UK newspapers are in my opinion absolute crap. They're
also very selective about what they publish, it may well be because
they're less politically uniform you'll get one paper that feels it's
in their ideological interest to mention a story, but that doesn't
mean you can just read one and get any sort of balance or good
reporting.

The Economist is the only one I read regularly these days.

Jim.

On 9/06/05 17:16, in article , "Jim
Ley" wrote:

The Sun, the Star, the Mirror, the Mail are all absolute crap, in fact
almost all the UK newspapers are in my opinion absolute crap. They're
also very selective about what they publish, it may well be because
they're less politically uniform you'll get one paper that feels it's
in their ideological interest to mention a story, but that doesn't
mean you can just read one and get any sort of balance or good
reporting.

The Economist is the only one I read regularly these days.


I like the Economist too. I don't normally buy UK papers in
Paris but do on vacation in Greece.

What about the Manchester Guardian??

Earl

Jim Ley wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 17:12:23 +0200, Earl Evleth
wrote:

But what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do
our UK readers recommend? Are they usually available
on the continent??

The Sun, the Star, the Mirror, the Mail are all absolute crap, in fact
almost all the UK newspapers are in my opinion absolute crap. They're
also very selective about what they publish, it may well be because
they're less politically uniform you'll get one paper that feels it's
in their ideological interest to mention a story, but that doesn't
mean you can just read one and get any sort of balance or good
reporting.

The Economist is the only one I read regularly these days.



It is excellent, especially since US "news" magazines such as _Time_ and
_Newsweek_ are into vapid info - tainment these days...the _Economist_
actually takes a day or two to read...

Speaking as a USAin, I like the _Guardian_ and the _Independent_...

_The Sun_ is worth the ocassional laugh, I like the "slimming" articles and
the "Dear Meg" or whatever agony aunt column...

--
Best
Greg

Earl Evleth wrote:

On 9/06/05 17:16, in article , "Jim
Ley" wrote:

The Sun, the Star, the Mirror, the Mail are all absolute crap, in fact
almost all the UK newspapers are in my opinion absolute crap. They're
also very selective about what they publish, it may well be because
they're less politically uniform you'll get one paper that feels it's
in their ideological interest to mention a story, but that doesn't
mean you can just read one and get any sort of balance or good
reporting.

The Economist is the only one I read regularly these days.


I like the Economist too. I don't normally buy UK papers in
Paris but do on vacation in Greece.

What about the Manchester Guardian??


Also what is now considered "the newspaper of record"? Years ago it was
_The Times_...

--
Best
Greg

"Earl Evleth" a écrit dans le message de
...

The following item indicates that the UK newspapers are
now doing a better job than the now terrorized American press.

But what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do
our UK readers recommend? Are they usually available
on the continent??

SNIP

Many a true word is spoken in jest, as the cliché says. This was found at :
http://www.artsjournal.com/herman/ar...20040301.shtml :

This little joke appears to be based on a piece of dialogue from 'A
Conflict of Interest,' an episode of the BBC series 'Yes, Prime Minister'
that premiered on December 29, 1987." Here's the script:
Jim Hacker (The Prime Minister): "Don't tell me about the press. I know
exactly who reads the papers:

The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
The Times is read by people who actually do run the country;
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by
another country;
And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.

Sir Humphrey (The Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet):"Prime Minister, what
about the people who read the Sun?"
Bernard Woolley (Hacker's Personal Private Secretary): "Sun readers don't
care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.

"The source is here," Hunka adds. (He thinks this list is "funnier, too.")
It's from The Yes (Prime) Minister Files :

http://www.yes-minister.com/ypmseas2a.htm

I'm not sure if the Morning Star still exists, but sometimes you could use
the same quote about the "Independent" ;-)

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels)

Earl Evleth writes:

The following item indicates that the UK newspapers are
now doing a better job than the now terrorized American press.

But what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do
our UK readers recommend? Are they usually available
on the continent??

* The Guardian has the most free content and is very "liberal" (in the
US sense). It's tabloid G2 section is always interesting, but it's
more like a magazine than a classical newspaper.

* The Independent is pro-Europe and was vigorously against the Iraq
war. It is my preferred choice, since it concentrates on news and
does it fairly well.

* The Telegraph is an old-fashioned social conservative quality paper,
and good for sports.

* The Times has never recovered from Murdoch buying it.

The rest of the dailies are strictly bogroll.

Des

"Earl Evleth" wrote in message
...

The following item indicates that the UK newspapers are
now doing a better job than the now terrorized American press.

But what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do
our UK readers recommend? Are they usually available
on the continent??

Being exposed to a different English language press
is possibly a broadening experience for traveling
Americans.

Earl


I first read the following in the "Yes, Mr. Prime Minister" book. There is a
fair amount of truth therein. The Times has gone downhill since Murdrek
(sic) bought it. The Guardian is probably the best written (although there
is clearly no copy editor on staff). The Financial Times is excellent and
the weekly The Economist is the best weekly news magazine in the English
speaking world (by far).

a.. The Times: Read by the people who run the country.
b.. Daily Mirror: Read by the people who think they run the country.
c.. Guardian: Read by the people who think they ought to run the country.
d.. Morning Star: Read by the people who think the country ought to be run
by another country.
e.. Daily Mail: Read by the wives of the people who own the country.
f.. Financial Times: Read by people who own the country.
g.. Daily Express: Read by the people who think that the country ought to
be run as it used to be.
h.. Daily Telegraph: Read by the people who think it still is.
i.. The Sun: Their readers don't care who runs the country as long as she
has big tits.
Paul

Des Small wrote:

* The Guardian has the most free content and is very "liberal" (in the
US sense). It's tabloid G2 section is always interesting, but it's
more like a magazine than a classical newspaper.

* The Independent is pro-Europe and was vigorously against the Iraq
war. It is my preferred choice, since it concentrates on news and
does it fairly well.

* The Telegraph is an old-fashioned social conservative quality paper,
and good for sports.

* The Times has never recovered from Murdoch buying it.

The rest of the dailies are strictly bogroll.

I disagree. They are not even good as bogroll.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED

what are the "good" UK newspapers? Which ones do our
UK readers recommend?

The Herald (Glasgow), particularly its Sunday edition.
The Independent (London).

Both put some of their content on the web - unfortunately
not much graphical stuff, both have first-rate photography.

============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/ for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557