Give up The Guardian


By MatthewHarris
June 8, 2012
Share

A nascent Facebook page that might amuse JC readers: http://m.facebook.com/pages/Give-up-The-Guardian/302780923149109?id=3027... More on this on Charlotte Henry's blog at: http://digitalpolitico.net/2012/06/08/giving-up-the-guardian/ Not a ban, not a boycott per se, just liberals saying: No thanks. We don't want you any more. We ain't buying. If being a Guardian Reader is a club, then we wish to resign. Actually, I quit years ago and don't miss it any more.

COMMENTS

happygoldfish

Mon, 06/11/2012 - 11:31

Rate this:

0 points

Matthew Harris: The paper that used to expose cant and hypocrisy is now a leading platform for the unexpurgated exposition of the very cant and hypocrisy that it used to expose.

matthew, when you say the guardian is "a leading platform for cant and hypocrisy", do you mean generally, or only in relation to israel?

if generally, will you give us any examples (or at least, subjects)?

if only in relation to israel, what is the problem? the non-israeli articles, you can read in comfort

and is it not better to read the cant and hypocrisy about israel, so that you know what is being said, rather than to ignore it?

how can we counter cant and hypocrisy, if we don't know what is being said?

are you aware, for example, that …

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/08/gaza-live-editors-note The Guardian's leader line is that the Gaza blockade is illegal in international law, that it constitutes collective punishment, and that it has not had its intended political outcome, which was to kill support for Hamas, drive a permanent wedge between it and Fatah and divide the Palestinians.

are you aware of the guardian's 12-hour "Gaza live blog" (yesterday, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2012/jun/08/gaza-live-blog), about 25 page-equivalents, plus videos, of information and propaganda?

the guardian's intention in publishing this may be deplorable, but the effect (unsurprisingly) is to reveal a lot of truth, particularly about hamas's intentions and maladministration, for example "But in February, a row between Hamas and the Egyptian government sparked the worst fuel shortages yet. … The result was a stalemate that caused Gaza to grind to a halt."

are liberal democrats better off not knowing this?


MatthewHarris

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 17:49

Rate this:

0 points

Thanks, you make some very good points. My "giving up The Guardian" was more an ironic expression of exasperation than anything else.


happygoldfish

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 09:20

Rate this:

1 point

MatthewHarris: Thanks, you make some very good points. My "giving up The Guardian" …

you mean your blogspot blog of 9th june entitled "giving up The Guardian"? and saying …

My friend Charlotte Henry was still a Guardian reader until yesterday, but then, like a smoker who catches sight of themselves smoking in the mirror and thinks "No more!", she decided to give it up. Charlotte and I are behind this Facebook page, Give up The Guardian: http://facebook.com/giveuptheguardian/

For me, this is not a ban or a boycott, it is just some Lib Dems and others saying: "No thanks. Include me out. I don't read The Guardian any more, and the club of Guardian readers is no longer for me."
I am, seriously, obviously not criticising anyone who still reads The Guardian and this is (obviously) not an attempt to put the paper out of business; for me, it is about the fact that "Guardian reader" used to be slang for a slightly earnest person of liberal conscience, possibly wearing a tweed jacket, perhaps drinking real ale, and maybe carrying a Penguin edition of George Orwell in the jacket pocket. "Oh," people would once say in response to my views, "You would say that, because you read The Guardian". And I used to be proud to fit that description.
The Guardian taught me to think and gave me a liberal conscience, and that conscience is now offended by The Guardian itself. The paper that used to expose cant and hypocrisy is now a leading platform for the unexpurgated exposition of the very cant and hypocrisy that it used to expose.

MatthewHarris: … was more an ironic expression of exasperation than anything else.

?? i don't see anything ironic about that

matthew, you've set up a facebook campaign page jointly with a younger liberal democrat colleague, charlotte henry (26), the only reasoning referred to on the page is yours, and there's nothing whatever on the page itself to suggest that it's not serious

you can't make a deliberate allegation (that the guardian is "a leading platform for cant and hypocrisy") and then, when challenged, expect to get away with saying that you were just being funny!

making false accusations isn't funny

making accusations and saying they're not false, but i can't be bothered to defend them, isn't funny

there's a website (i won't link to it) which some bloggers here like referring to, which is deliberately run with the sole purpose of publishing lies and half-truths to disparage another jc blogger

when i challenged one page on that site as a complete invention, after at first robustly defending it, they felt forced to claim that it was "a spoof"

first them, now you?

is this the new liberal democrat attitude to truth … speak first, and later claim it wasn't to be taken seriously?

hmm … and is it also the new liberal democrat attitude to promises … speak first, and later claim it wasn't to be taken seriously?

matthew, i wasn't asking a rhetorical question, i was expecting an answer, to …
matthew, when you say the guardian is "a leading platform for cant and hypocrisy", do you mean generally, or only in relation to israel?

if you can't seriously justify it, then withdraw it, and also delete the facebook campaign page that you've based on it

happygoldfish


MatthewHarris

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 11:07

Rate this:

0 points

Thanks, the piece on my blog is an explanation of why I do not wish to be considered a Guardian Reader; I say there that this is not a ban or a boycott - merely an expression of dismay about the current state of The Guardian.


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 12:11

Rate this:

0 points

Happy, I may not be very old.

And I may not be as wise as you (koff).

But I am old enough and wise enough to have learned this....

Once someone has stuck their head in the sand, all the devils in hell won't get them to pull it out again.


zaheerayin

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 12:24

Rate this:

0 points

Are you talking about Happygoldfish or Matthew Harris?


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 12:49

Rate this:

0 points

Zaheer....behave.


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 13:58

Rate this:

0 points

Happygoldfish accuses people of publishing a farrago of lies. That is easy to do. Yet there is no indication of, or identification of, these lies. She further strenuously attempts to do what she can to prevent people from accessing the material and judging for themselves.

It seems that she doesn't have much confidence in her assertions. Otherwise would she not want the whole world to see this farrago of lies for what it is ? Or does she think that mere mortals would not be able to spot the lies and therefore should be required just to take her word for it ?

Just what is it that sets happy apart from mere mortals ?


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 16:38

Rate this:

0 points

"....... with the sole purpose of publishing lies and half-truths to disparage another jc blogger"

What do you mean by this ? Is it just words thrown together ? Or just cant and hypocracy ?

If you can't seriously justify it then withdraw it. Thank you in advance.


JC Webmaster

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 17:16

Rate this:

0 points

This comment by Chris Tucker has been moderated


zaheerayin

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 17:21

Rate this:

0 points

You have to wonder about someone that wastes so much time and energy stomping on poor, harmless, ineffectual Matthew.


happygoldfish

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 17:52

Rate this:

0 points

come off it matthew, your blog of 9th june is there to draw attention to the facebook campaign page created on 8th june by you (and another)

and the only reasoning on the facebook page is the reference to your blog (also 9th june)

and anyway, that's not true …

MatthewHarris: … the piece on my blog is an explanation of why I do not wish to be considered a Guardian Reader …

… it's not an explanation, it's a serious accusation (that the guardian is "a leading platform for cant and hypocrisy" ) without an explanation …

for the third time, what do you mean by this?

is it just words randomly thrown together?

or just cant and hypocrisy?

happygoldfish


JC Webmaster

Fri, 06/15/2012 - 09:50

Rate this:

0 points

Comments for this page are now closed.