Scottish Newspapers and Magazines

[Mike_Oettle]

Neloon, you folk in Britain are privileged to have newspapers that represent diverse political opinions.
In my country we have papers that are slavishly pro-government, and papers that are not quite so slavish, but nothing independent.

[Alan H]

I actually subscribe to the daily e-mail distribution of the Guardian, just to get a clue what the rest of the world, even the folks "on our side" are saying.

[The Q]

I actually subscribe to the daily e-mail distribution of the Guardian, just to get a clue what the rest of the world, even the folks "on our side" are saying.

An interesting choice,
The formerly " Manchester Gruinnad" a left of centre paper known for it's spelling mistakes and readership by teachers.

[Alan H]

I wrote a much larger response, but seeing as it will do little but piss off a lot of people and likely get pulled for numerous rule violations....I've edited out 80% of it. Here's what remains.

=====================

I picked the Guardian because I requested an article from them...actually a BBC article reprint. Somehow I got on their distribution list. I found it interesting and so I stay on it. That's it.

No corruption. No blame. Don't really care about your analysis of the publication. And so far, no misspelling issues that I've noticed.

[The Q]

It was not meant to be a criticism of your choice, more surprise that someone in the USA had even heard of the Guardian, as few will have heard of anything other than The Times (or possibly The Mirror / News of the World having been involved in the phone hacking cases).
As for my notes on it's assessment the spelling mistakes are long gone with computerization (but still a running joke) however it is still beloved of Teachers. It is one of the more Intelligent papers with reasoned arguments.

I was going to type a long assessment of UK /Scottish papers but then I came across this,
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...tishNewspapers

which as far as I can see is a fairly accurate assessment that neither left or Right would disagree with

[Alan H]

It was not meant to be a criticism of your choice, more surprise that someone in the USA had even heard of the Guardian, as few will have heard of anything other than The Times (or possibly The Mirror / News of the World having been involved in the phone hacking cases).
As for my notes on it's assessment the spelling mistakes are long gone with computerization (but still a running joke) however it is still beloved of Teachers. It is one of the more Intelligent papers with reasoned arguments.

I was going to type a long assessment of UK /Scottish papers but then I came across this,
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...tishNewspapers

which as far as I can see is a fairly accurate assessment that neither left or Right would disagree with

Yes, the Mirror is somewhat notorious!

I'm surprised that it's loved by teachers. I mean, I guess I'm surprised that someone took the time to find out that teachers prefer that paper over others! Someone is seriously into their reader demographics!

[The Q]

The Telegraph, Times and Guardian have educational information / job recruitment in their papers, being left right or Establishment as per their point of view. The Times also owned, The Times Educational Supplement, which has / had separate versions for Scotland and Wales. It was sold off in 2005 and is now known as TES,(TESS in Scotland), there are now versions for Australia and India.

My guess is that with teachers being normally more educated than the General population they migrated to reading these three papers more, due to their intellectual content than the more mass market papers.
I must admit I can't remember if any of the Scottish only nationals have educational sections or Supplements.

[Tarheel]

I actually subscribe to the daily e-mail distribution of the Guardian, just to get a clue what the rest of the world, even the folks "on our side" are saying.

There are those of us that are not ever satisfied that the news we receive is correct or complete. I too browse the Guardian on line for the "Overseas" take of an issue. I'll also check with the "Onion", (Reuters, BBC and TESS when I need to.)
I was given two ears and two eyes for seeing and hearing both sides of a story.

Back to issue, I hope you get the best exposure from the media you choose to present the project we have come to appreciate.

[Alan H]

Having been the subject of a number of newspaper and magazine articles..

Some because of a former job that I had, doing environmental education
Several more because of the Highland Games

I can tell you that not ONE time has the printed article been without major factual errors. It's really astounding what A.) reporters can screw up or B.) what editors can do in terms of destroying what reporters give them.

Case in point: A couple of years ago I had a reporter out to practice to write about the highland games. I gave her chances to throw several of the implements as well as watch us throw and talk to us about the Games. She threw both hammer and the weight for distance. I explained what both of them were. I had the photographer take pictures of each of them, independently. I explained it again. Then I explained the difference between them *again*. All told, I explained the difference between a hammer and a weight SIX TIMES to this reporter. Not only that but she threw each of them several times.

Sure enough, in the article, the photograph of me throwing the weight for distance was labelled "hammer".

If a reporter can't get THAT right -such a simple thing...after having it told to them SIX times, after having their hands on the equipment after even throwing the equipment, themselves how can I trust ANY reporter to get ANYTHING right?

I've had reporters write and publish that I was holding a bat ray on board the research vessel I was working on...label a photograph that way when in fact I'm holding a shiner perch in the picture. It seems like an easy mistake to make until you realize that the reporter was at that touch tank, handling the fish herself for OVER AN HOUR AND A HALF. This is a shiner perch. Here's a waterproof key to the fish of San Francisco Bay....figure out what it is! WOW! It's a shiner perch! And she still got it wrong.

Now, did the REPORTERS get it wrong, or did the editors slash and cut all integrity out of the story before it went to print? I don't know. But I know this.

If after a four hour trip on the Bay, handling fish on deck for an HOUR AND A HALF, and keying out the fish..taking pictures of the fish... completely immersed in everything "fish".... the story that comes out is still wrong...

If after being told the difference between a hammer and a weight SIX times, after holding it in her hands, after taking pictures of each of them, and after throwing them herself and the story STILL gets it wrong....

Then how on EARTH can I trust a reporter to get everything right about a story on something REALLY complicated, like for example...Internet Security, or ISIS, or any actual bill coming before Congress or the State Legistlature? Did Eric Snowden actually SAY that? Probably not. Did David Cameron ACTUALLY say "“For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. " We really don't know, if we're depending on some reporter and editor to tell us.

No way. There's NO WAY they get it even vaguely close to right. I would like to try to believe that at least part of the news that I read about and see online is true and accurate but from my own personal experience I know that it's not. It will be flat-out dead wrong in many ways. And so I don't trust "the news" at all. Not one tiny little bit. It's all BS.

[Stitchwiz]

I hope that you will be preparing your own press release, Alan. This way half of the equation is in your hands. At least you will know that any errors in print will have been caused by the editors.