“With social media now on a path towards unmediated chaos, the hunger for publications with actual editorial standards — such as this one — really ought to grow.” Hugo Rifkind in The Times.
Regular readers of “The Times” might smile at the “such as this one” boast. Yes the newspaper is still infinitely better than the chaos of Musk or Zuckerberg. But in recent times especially it has shifted noticeably to the Right in its Comment content, in the prominence it gives to stories critical of the liberal establishment and in who it employs to write features in its pages.
We have seen with the once reasonably respectable Daily Telegraph what happens when a grotesquely slanted proprietor driven political imperative takes over and dominates. The Times is in danger of doing the same. Once fairly balanced contributors have in some cases shifted rightward (I exclude Hugo, from this charge !). And the editorial imperative is increasingly National conservative (if not Conservative).
Proprietors have always influenced their publications’ political positioning – look at Northcliffe or Beaverbrook in days of yore. Zuckerberg is a modern day Beaver or, one could argue, adopting the position of the Barclays or of Murdoch. To find genuinely independent journalism with editorial standards that include balance is increasingly difficult.
Paddy’s Blogs in a crazy world 
I’m seriously looking to move somewhere for the next four years—perhaps an island or a boat without internet, phones, or TV. If I survive, I am certain I will be reborn. Ignorance is sometimes good for the soul.
Social Media is the curse of a generation. At least some newspapers rarely write part of the actualité. Most write biased nonsense. The Times, in particular, swung to the far right after the Labour victory under Murdoch’s instruction, I am sure. I am considering ending my subscription. It galls me that my money supports this process.
I won’t need it anyway living in a cave on my island.
LikeLike