Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

tried it and got the pavement article...

god that costner article is appalling....like she never once proves his motives are bad or wrong. i read that he has invested about 24m in this project, even if it is a heap of bollocks at least he's trying. also the southerners/incest line in it is just jan moir level.

This is good: http://guardian.gyford.com

ok wtf at this

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/lostinshowbiz/2010/jun/17/jordan-alex-reid-wedding

this column is bad enuf when marina hyde is doing it

idk why the guardian is doing lame whogivesashit.jpg celebrity gossip anyway

also, the gingham shirt done up to the top button... im just not seeing it

idk why the guardian is doing lame whogivesashit.jpg celebrity gossip anyway

Well it's either that or repping for a Tory government so they might as well become Now

idk why the guardian is doing lame whogivesashit.jpg celebrity gossip anyway

you don't? seriously???

It is a fair question really. How much impact do you think the Graun's Jordan coverage has on its circulation?

very little

pageviews, quite a lot

http://guardian.gyford.com/

i REALLY like this

i dunno. the guardian's celeb coverage takes a sort-of-not-really-but-really "we're above all this" tone (even though they aren't) which i doubt is that appealing to people googling "jordan". or are its core readers just getting thicker? ah, now i see it.

people googling 'jordan' aren't rly going to notice an 'above all this tone'?

"above all, tits" tone

you're thinking of img search, really

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2010/jul/02/welcome-to-guardian-co-uk-for-former-times-readers

This is very possibly the smuggest thing I have ever read.

News blog – most commented

1. 1. Lady Gaga tops 10m Facebook fans (44)

As this is a sales pitch, I've been asked to mention that the new Oxford Book of Parodies says I'm one of Britain's best parodists, dead or alive. You can work out which.

jesus effing christ

oh god just stopped reading now

if i were an ex-times reader i'd probably be getting out my bank card

£2 a week isn't *that* much

yeah

the times is shit tho

disregarding all the terrible blogs (easily done), the guardian website is pretty good

If I were a Times reader I'd be jumping ship to the Telegraph website really.

We've never quite understood your fascination with Giles Coren, especially as his much more talented sister Victoria writes for us twice (yes twice) a week, but each to their own

that's probably true

they both appear to be fairly dreadful ppl

lol ismael

we don't really "get" why you plebs like jon gaunt, especially as we have richard littlejohn

Victoria *is* nicer - friend has known her since childhood, friend is not fan of brother.

Victoria's pretty fucking obnoxious in her own right. And Giles is a better writer. But also restaurants >>>>> poker.

victoria is definitely the better (and more sympathetic) writer

though does ilx think anyone is a good writer anywhere? like even most of the mentions of marina hyde are people slagging her off

Marina Hyde is also kind of smug and not very funny.

you see? sorry if you don't think marina hyde is an incredible writer then we have very different ideas of what good writing is.

I think we evidently have very different ideas of what "incredible writing" is.

yeah m hyde can def write

As baronet's daughters go, I'll take her over Sam Cam any day.

like not thomas de quincey level but for sure better than david brooks or shaun custis

You know the reaction you get with stand-up comedians? That's the reaction I get with Marina Hyde.

^^observational comedy

i have even read marina hyde on f***ball, that's how much i love her writing

though does ilx think anyone is a good writer anywhere? like even most of the mentions of marina hyde are people slagging her off

I think the answer is maybe no! I get the impression people here find the column format pretty insufferable? (I do too but I don't read a news-source so it's not really relevant)

Her tone worked great for the political diaries she used to write. "Aren't these politicians ridiculous" is a lot more fun for me than "aren't these celebrities ridiculous." But maybe this is just a way of saying the better her subject matter the better she is.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/03/conservatives-cameron-labour-blair/print

There are columnists and writers I like a lot in the Guardian/Observer - David Conn, Will Hutton, Deborah Orr, David Mitchell, Nancy Banks Smith, Andrew Rawnsley has his moments.

What I don't like about Guardian columnists in general, and Marina Hyde in particular, is the combination of faux-mateyness and "we are so above this, aren't we?" Also she is NOT FUNNY, which surely is the point in the first place?

That said I don't think I can remember an essentially frivolous Guardian column annoying me as much as this crap Philip Roth from the Independent.

matt dc otfm

i did like marina hyde more back in the day, but seems really full of herself now. also giving a shit about celebrities/pretending to give a shit about celebrities/being ironic about giving a shit about celebrities/etc. is really something i don't give a shit about.

Piers. Morgan.

emphasize "really" coz i guess she always did

xpost

david mitchell?! isn't he just some jumped-up comedian who's inexplicably got a broadsheet column out of his terrible career?

will hutton is smart but not a terribly exciting writer imo. i don't know who david conn is offhand! nancy banks smith is marvellous. <3 <3 rawnsley.

marina h is very funny. not belly laughs obv, but i love her bone-dry humour.

david mitchell?! isn't he just some jumped-up comedian who's inexplicably got a broadsheet column out of his terrible career?

A terrible, jumped-up career including being the star of 5+ award-winning series of one of the better UK sitcoms in recent memory, more critical praise for his sketch show with Robert Webb, a handful of movies, regular appearances on Have I Got News For You and other such panel shows etc.. etc...

a handful of movies, regular appearances on Have I Got News For You and other such panel shows

In fairness these are not proof of being a non-terrible comedian. The Lex pretty much wishes jihad against all comedians anyway so this is not really a battle worth fighting.

I, for one, look forward to watching I Could Never be Your Woman.

I'm not a massive fan of comedians myself (waves hand vaguely at generalisation), however, I quite often find myself mildly surprised with the thoughtfulness of DM's column. Not always by any means, and the little sardonic comedic touches leave me cold, but he attempts to engage with his subjects more or less seriously (sometimes). I guess I got low expectations, but he's far from being the worst, I think.

marina hyde is dire....she hasn't got a clue about football and that parasite on the back of celebrity writing is just nasty/ugly/pointless. if you want to say "a good writer" in some abstract "can get a meaning across" way then great but that's not worth a lot if the tone and opinions are such drivel. it's just fuel to the fire of people who think disliking populist thing x makes them smart.

and i don't even agree she's a good writer, the columns are unreadable half the time due to being so overloaded. eg last thing i read, here's a random sentenceL

No one really expected Fabio Capello's side to have learned how to pass or anything since last Saturday but they seemed to have mastered the art of remote delegation, somehow contriving to ensure that several obliging nations (and the odd referee) helped them out of the hole they were in, though possibly not out of a German-shaped one threatening to engulf them further down the road.

is this really good writing?

history mayne otm when he said: also giving a shit about celebrities/pretending to give a shit about celebrities/being ironic about giving a shit about celebrities/etc. is really something i don't give a shit about.

this all too prevalent style is even worse than say, heat mag, or whatever as it has pretensions to being better. plus it's the basis of most of the guardian's desperate fiending for hits (lets face it marina hyde and charlie brooker are shaving off bits of their brain every time they're wheeled out to suck in 500 comments and a load of hits with some woeful piece of "snark")

david mitchell on the other hand, so unbelievably boring. in real life he basically is like a smug and arrogant mark corrigan.

what i like in the guardian: nigel slater, barry glendenning's rumour mills, oliver burkeman can be good sometimes, at least is thoughtful, probably some other stuff i'm forgetting.