« David Cameron: We won't 'seal the deal' until General Election Day | Main | Time cover story reveals a little more of David Cameron the man »


Having found some time ago that the Guardian can amuse by some of its good writing, it is even more amusing to see them winding up the Labour Party.

A particular amusement in the above analysis is that Polly Toynbee is "livid" at the new neutral positioning. Is that the same Polly Toynbee that has recently been calling for the PM to resign on grounds of his all-round uselessness? It obviously can't be, as how could someone who thinks the Government is so useless be upset when their newspaper ceases to support it so wholeheartedly? Or it is: my Party useless or not? Perhaps it's time for the Guardian to move towards a more neutral position on Ms Toynbee herself, and let her go off and rant on some other newspaper!

Even the Guardianistas know that the Zimbabwisation of the Former UK cannot go on indefinitely.

The Guardian acknowledges it is all up with Labour - read Polly's articles, she says so often enough.

The Guardian trying to save its charitable status from a circling right-wing consensus?

On the subject of the BBC, it needs to be cut down to size as soon as Cameron steps across the theshold of Number 10. BBC employees need not worry about its cherished "independence" though: the Government will have no scope to interfere when it's floated on the stock exchange.

It's quite funny really. Especially as the Telegraph is going to the left at the moment.

The Guardian is the newspaper of the idea's class notably the BBC meaning the BBC is full of people with idea's. I think not!
A better description would be chattering class I doubt if it is ever read by anyone with a proper job.
I know the inhabitants of the Westminster village will throw their arms up in horror but it is the people who read the Mail, Express possibly the Telegraph and yes the Sun, these are the readers who voted for the Conservatives when we were last in power and they will be the ones to do it again.
I very much doubt if the "few" people who read the Guardian would ever vote Tory.

I admit I have lived in France for the last 15 years (I am about to return) but I am astonished at your comment on 'the two newspapers that really count' where is your evidence for that? What are their sales? I read all the main newspapers on line and the Guardian and Mail are at the end of the heap if I feel inclined. Because the Times does not know which way they are being told to jump yet they tend to give, inadvertently it may be said, a sort of balance; the Telegraph also doesn't know where it is going but it at least has the merit of sometimes offering both sides of the coin. The Guardian just fires on one gun, the Daily Mail is suffering from schizophrenia, in that it's main chap is a devotee of Brown. How is one getting a balanced situation from that set-up? Your premis is flawed I suggest and an argument fruitless.

Catch more flies with honey etc.

When the grauniad and the Windypendent are at odds over the position of the Conservatives, mirth and malice are truly afoot and those of us outside the Left/Liberal camp can happily sit back to watch the fun.

To be fair, I think the Sun matters, a lot.

I agree with NeilW, the Sun is still the most important paper in Britain.

Well the Guardian interviewed me a few years ago they can't be all bad. Maybe they liked my blunt views on Shaun Woodward...

The Mail and The Sun are for people with IQs no higher than double figures. (Probably about 90-95).

Let the Guardian convert if it wants. It is too late.
When we set up www.jobs.gov.uk after the GE, it is dead anyway.

Revenge against the BBC that's the important thing. Privatisation's too noisy. I favour putting in a Tory Board and DG and then having a show trial of bias against the current political editors and putting in our own men a Berlusconi.

@West London Tory

Are you sure you're in the right party? I don't think I've ever heard anything so stupidly snobish. An IQ of 100 is the 50th centile and 90-95 is 40% - 50% What's wrong with that. Better to have an IQ of 95 and realise that this government's s**t like the Express, than 195 and think voting Labour's a good idea like the Independent.

I think it was Hayek who said, it is a common mistake of the intelligent that they tend to over-value intelligence. And you as well, it seems.

PS As to the question, to which University did I go; the answers both.

Revenge against the BBC that's the important thing

Politics of revenge, spite and jealosy belongs to the sinister (as in left).... and nobody wins if they have their way.

The Sun follows its readers. It doesn't lead them.

With an IQ of 161 (the last time it was measured - admittedly before the drink addled the little grey cells!) I feel I must be reading the wrong newspapers. I just want to be normal - you know, support the Conservatives, get rid of this abysmal Labour government, pay less tax, be in control of my life and help my family prosper.

Can anyone help?

I wouldn't say the Mail is any particular fan of David Cameron - in fact at times it annoys me intensely with its unhelpful stance, for example Melanie Phillips' (someone I respect greatly when she writes about Islamism and the Middle East) article yesterday.
As for the Guardian - it is a well-written newspaper and I have always enjoyed its non-political articles. I am now beginning to find myself a great deal less annoyed by its political stance now too!
I think my newspaper of choice at the moment is the Times which seems to be going from strength to strength. I would read the Telegraph more if it would only reduce its size as it is impossible to read on the tube for instance!!


This is a link to the Phillips article I'm talking about.

I think you'll find West London Tory that the Daily Mail is read by more people in the ABC1 (upper professional brackets)categories than any of the (old) broadsheet newspapers.In my experience those who criticise the Mail usually don't read it and are criticising its reputation rather than the reality.
In terms of circulation the Sun is the leader by a mile but I do wonder whether its party political coverage actually carries much weight in persuading its readers to change their votes.
The Guardian has influence far beyond its circulation,although selling only 20% of the copies of the Sun it's columnists are quoted much more widely in the broadcast media (including Conhome!)particularly the BBC which is far,far more influential than any newspaper.

"I think you'll find West London Tory that the Daily Mail is read by more people in the ABC1 (upper professional brackets)categories than any of the (old) broadsheet newspapers."

Reminds me of the old saying, Malcolm that The Times is read by those who run the country, The Daily Mail is read by the wives of those who run the country.....

P.S. I have to say that when one is in a "girlie" mood the Mail does have very good features on fashion, beauty etc. etc. etc. I realise of course this will not be of much interest to you ;-)

Jonathan @ 23:22 - if one were being "picky" there are actually two or more methods of establishing IQ and the figures are different - I can't recall the finer points but I believe in one system the threshold for joining MENSA is 148 and under another system it is 132! In any event, 90-95 IS pretty low by anybody's standards I think.
West London Tory - perhaps I should stop drinking so much coffee and then my IQ would improve ... ;-)

As one comedian said on Mock the Week about slogans for newspapers "Daily Mail...racist, so you dont have to be". Some of the stuff it comes out with can be off putting. The way it went to with aboertion while understandable given its standing on social issues was gross.

Ive always been a Times man.

The Daily Mail racist James? Remind me,which newspaper named Steven Lawrence's killers and invited them to sue?
Sally you would be very suprised at what I find interesting!

"Sally you would be very suprised at what I find interesting!"

Malcolm there is not much which surprises me these days...!

The Guardian's emerging support for Cameron is more a comment on just how far left his political stance is than any movement to the Right of that boorish newspaper. I cannot understand how anyone purporting to be Conservative would ever read it.

I AM a conservative, I do not purport - and I read the Guardian. Mainly because I do not think it healthy to surround myself with people and media that merely agree with my point of view and because on the whole it is well written.

There is a vile tone to much of the comment on this post - it reminds me of the class warfare continued by the offensive elements of the Labour Party.

This is the full quote I was thinking earlier (by courtesy of Wikipedia!):-

"In Episode 4 of the second series of Yes, Prime Minister, Jim Hacker says:
"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: "Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?"
Bernard Woolley: "Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits."

In the same vein, the Daily Mirror have taken over at The Telegraph

Mmm, interesting, but the BBC cannot be cracked in the same way. It needs structural reforms to remove the inherent bias towards the left that results from creating a state funded media giant.

Cameron should start in motion a grander strategy to manage this. For me? I would want informal discussions with senior members of the corporation to discuss the options. If they don't agree to enter into a positive roll for themselves in this change, then I'd threaten to launch a policy review team to 'look at the options'. For a start I'd delight in telling them that the license fee increase would be linked to the state pension.

Back to news papers: One publication Cameron hasn't wooed yet is the FT (been banging on about this for a while now). Editorial line there remains cool and aloof. Need to fix that too. Big hint: Start by wooing the (ex?) Blairite Philip Stephens.

Shock Horror, lately I too have been more inclined to read the Guardian.. off and on-line, Yes their comments sections and some of their reporting still riles me, but to be honest it does tend to be a good read with usually good standards while many other papers just seem to have turned into daily entertainment rags.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker