Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

Suzy you can't really say to someone "I think you're wrong to say this woman is cute and by the way I am judging you in a non-specific way for thinking so" and then dismiss people for getting arsey with you.

B-b-but I just did, because it's not the same as calling someone ugly. TRAVIS, YOU'RE A YEAR TOO LATE.

yeah i think it's a bit tendentious to say someone's byline photo confers 'winsome and unthreatening' when their columns are so caustic and unkind

I didn't say you called them ugly. However, "she's all thin, stringy hair, with kind of average looks" is definitely implying the less attractive side of "average" from what I can see.

It's exactly the sort of glass-half-empty trick you'd attack a Daily Mail writer for!

Female byline photos are ALWAYS about the 'chin-down, eyes up' winsomeness regardless of the writer's output, so I certainly shouldn't single her out, but it's always struck me as funny because it's something a contributor has more control over than most other stuff at work.

so why did you single her out? that's just asking for tendentious speculation about why you would be so embittered w/ hadley freeman

Because she was the one YOU GUYS started talking about; I merely responded with an opinion that was actually pretty mild and unthreatening.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v165/noodle_vague/angry-phone-call.jpg

you described her thin, stringy hair as notionally winsome/unthreatening, rather than attributing those qualities to the generic 'simpering byline photo' pose

read yr (own) posts

i think suzy conflated two decent opportunities for snark and got hoisted on her own petard

- the chance to decry ppl approving of female journalist's looks w/out reference to their actual work/thought
- the chance to throw h freeman's own caustic looks-based sneering right back at her

Of course I read my own posts. However, I also read yours:

she used to have the world's cutest byline photograph

Don't try to turn this into resentment, racism, or a lack of comprehension just because I happen to disagree.

going back to freeman, her fashion columns are mostly "i hate hipster trend x". or "this new cool thing guardian readers may like, it's a ruddy nonsense!".

so comment is free lifestyle writing then, basically.

for the third time suzy, i am sufficiently convinced of yr nonracist bona fides that i could make a throwaway joke abt yr inexplicable h8 of hadley freeman and her terrible junkie hair

nb - not saying she's an actual junkie ;)

enjoying the r-bombs in this thread, was worried it was going to be social network spoilers for a bit

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/lloyd-marcus-tea-party-blog/2010/oct/08/lloyd-marcus-tea-party

is this going to turn out to be a clever spoof, like that faux-david aaronovitch character they used to have?

Guardian comment-is-free seems to be full of right wingers telling each other how left wing all the cif people are while the strawmen have left the building.

Good grief you can't say things like that on CIF!!!
It's all about "entitlements" and big, all encompassing government on here.

Your story will be unacceptable to the Guardian crowd.

Oh dear, you're not going to be popular on here.

*awaiting the deluge of white liberals to tell you how you should really feel*

oh dear, you conjured up those dirty words: "Self Reliance", "Aspiration", "Initiative", "Personal Responsibility"...

you should know those are bad things here on CiF where, for many people, "social justice" is about keeping us all down at the lowest common denominator, helpless and dependent on nanny government who will always provide us a convenient scape-goat to blame when people don't provide us the things that we want....and its always their responsibility to provide those things right?

Ha, OTM.

Amused to see a ranting right-winger on there called BrownOutNow. Keep up, pal, there was an election.

add an s and it probably makes sense :(

yeah it really is like that...it's weird. seems the only people that can be bothered to comment are the negativos

it's pretty much the same on the daily mail comments. comments are great.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2010/oct/19/indie-professor-guest-pass

That column is total garbage.

A panel debate on web moderation

is rusbridger's daughter still on the job?

all reference to her seems to have disappeared from the guardian's website. wonder if she has a new new name.

that's enough, laurie penny

On a related note, I'm guessing the Evening Standard's fashion churnalist Karen Dacre is Paul Dacre's daughter?

Forgive them almost anything after 'Kicker Conspiracy' being the most visible thing on the front page today.

that definitely made me enjoy being in a train station newsagent about two to five times as much as i would have otherwise

is rusbridger's daughter still on the job?

― former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 25 October 2010 14:00 (2 days ago) Bookmark

http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/user/BellaM for the collected works. i've given up on feeling irritated by the nepotism because forcing rusbridger's daughter to spend her days reading the comments on the guardian website is too perfect an example of "the sins of the father..."

fair point

Linda Norgrove's parents refuse to blame US forces
Last updated five minutes ago
US given credit for admitting aid worker was probably killed by grenade thrown during rescue

what a horribly formed headline

Oi HM, what's your problem with Laurie Penny?

Scabs!

Also not nearly as funny as they think it is.

ok not in the guardian but this is just appalling

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/laurie-penny/2010/11/british-war-poppy-carnage

British children are raised on the mythology of those wars [WWs I & II], in part because, particularly in the case of the Second World War, there were clear moral and practical reasons why conflict was unavoidable, and more to the point, we won.

yeah, it's probably just triumphalism

it should be doubly offensive, then, that almost a century later members of the British administration wear poppies while sending young people to fight and die far from home for causes they barely comprehend.

pretty sure dudes who volunteered for the forces have some idea of why they're in afghanistan-pakistan, but i guess they didn't go to a good college like laurie

It is understandable that friends and relatives of the fallen might wish to find meaning and purpose in the offensive futility of war

s0 unbelievably trite. she finds the 'futility' of war 'offensive'? offensive. really? that's the worst thing she can say about it? while belittling (and i think misunderstanding) the relatives and friends of the dead.

Mayne, you totally have, like, the *BIGGEST* squelching crush in the world on Laurie Penny, don't you?

nope. suzy aksed me to back up my dislike for her with hard stats -- et voila.

is the new statesman worth reading? every time someone here mentions it, it's to rip it to shreds

There are plenty of columnists who irritate or annoy me on a weekly or even daily basis, but you don't see me going and making endless complaints about them on every single thread ever. I think you have the biggest hard-on for Penny Red I've seen since the crush I had on Julian Casablancas when I used to complain about the Strokes on every other thread.

Like, this is the most blatant case of pigtail pulling I've ever seen.

Nick Lezard's column, detailing his ongoing descent into penury, can be funny. Paul Mason writes some dece things there.

Looking forward to History Mayne's Nina Power dossier btw.

sometimes they do a decent book review

politically it's been taken over by a bunch of young-ish, dimwitted tribalists, in the last couple of years -- nominally left-wing, but not hard thinkers

the editor is a complete lightweight, making his way up the ladder

it's always had problems, but was better under john kampfner/martin bright

xpost

oh god nick lezard? really?

you don't see me going and making endless complaints about them on every single thread ever

three threads, i think? two of them in response to other people (not me) posting something by laurie penny

i mean, if you like her work, defend it, but don't lean on some bullshit 'he's being mean about a gurle' line. im mean about all kinds of people.

The best thing in the New Statesman is Will Self reviewing fast food restaurants. Make of that what you may.

yeah exactly -- 1) isn't this kind of sunday supplement? 2) in 1996?

i'm asking mainly because the lovely Emma B is looking for a weekly politics/world affairs magazine that isn't basically right-wing