Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

lol

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/sep/07/female-genital-mutilation-tradition-somalia

Although Muslim, Jewish and Christian communities carry out FGM, mainstream spiritual leaders from all three religions have denied that the practice stems from religion. Samira believes the desire to control women's sexuality lies behind it.

What's up with that one then, spell out for dummy pls

the impulse to be even-handed is problematic when it starts inventing facts - FGM doesn't exist in the Jewish tradition.

Ah yeah

I also wonder if 'stemming from religion' and 'stemming from a desire to control sexuality' are necessarily two different things

It has been practised in Christian and animist communities too,[74] including by the Christian Copts in Egypt and Sudan.[80] Judaism requires circumcision for boys, but does not allow it for girls.[81] Shaye J. D. Cohen writes that the only Jews known to have practised FGM are the Beta Israel of Ethiopia.[82]

What human faces might look like in 100,000 years

Picture doesn't disappoint.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/18/human-faces-in-the-future

science

It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism. It's conjecture, but also more than armchair futurism.

Our eyes will grow to Japanese anime-style proportions in the meantime

that whole tech supplement was awful.

So, in other words, not OTM at all.

I for one welcome our new Loris overlords.

It's a shame other places had this story three months ago:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/06/07/how-the-human-face-might-look-in-100000-years/

also a shame it's a spurious load of old bollocks

The media landscape is a vale of shame and old bollocks.

Stephen Fry joins demand to end NSA and GCHQ mass surveillance

lol

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/sep/27/danny-brown-old

As well as trading verses with performers such as southern rap rising stars A$AP and Tech N9ne

Been meaning to come here to say that the Qatar forced labour story is a great piece of investigative journalism.

It is, though the use of similar techniques across the gulf is hardly a secret, it's great to see someone making a big issue of it.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/sep/18/how-to-pick-up-women-with-science

Darwin gets a capital letter, Skinner doesn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVySc2Qu3WI

I don't think I can even piece together the thought process that led to this being created

SKINNER DOESN'T DESERVE A CAPITAL LETTER

Big rusbridger/graun thing in the NYer: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/10/07/131007fa_fact_auletta?mbid=social_retweet

i enjoyed this ^
there are some perhaps contradictory indications about its paywall but its kinda utopian free-access ideal is pretty nice to read

I know the Guardian would happily liveblog a day in a goldfish bowl, but doing "Later...With Jools Holland" feels like another level of pointlessness altogether.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2013/oct/01/later-jools-holland-franz-ferdinand-live

that "chat and dave" comment particularly missed the point. i watched it this morning and their chat with jools was all about east end culture and music hall and oral tradition and how the songs would be lost otherwise. and skiffle. but, no, he only live-blogged the dull bits.

(chas and dave documentary on bbc4 recently was similarly interesting. not a fan of the music and that gig footage looked like my idea of HELL but... oh, it also contained the factoid that it's one of chas or dave who was sampled on that huge eminem hit)

lol wait he was liveblogging... from home?

I forgot that Time Jonze was the guy who wrote the Morrissey interview that led to Moz suing the NME, when I googled him just now the third result is a Morrissey forum that has about 20 threads devoted to Tim Jonze character assastionations

Diehard Morrissey fans must be such a good judge of character

Man, imagine if Morrissey had been in Die Hard instead of Bruce Willis.

Every Die is like Sunday

yippee-ki-yay mother, i can feel the soil falling over my head

Morrissey fans go after anyone who disagrees with Morrissey. I think it was probably worse in Tim's case as he's a huge, huge fan of The Smiths and his palpable sense of disappointment was more cutting than a character assassination ever would be.

Yeah, that's pretty accurate. You can really only be referring to Morrissey Solo, which has the curious position of doing shit like that while being completely despised by Morrissey himself.

They are hated for loving.

I hold no brief for Morrissey or his fans but I share their ire at Tim Jonze, he's a useless writer.

They are hated for loving.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kjxnJzfdoM

I think there's something Chris Morris-esque about this Guardian advert from 1990.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9YiEu6eNOA

I hadn't realised that the Guardian running oddly conceived adverts was not just a recent thing. Some of these are great and some of these are awful, but they're all better than the 3 little pigs ad.

I'm mystified by the guy in the changing room room cracking up over the Guardian, is he meant to be reading a particularly funny 'If...' strip or something? Was the Guardian selling itself on the quality of its humour writing in the 80s?

90s masthead was so great.

yeah

tempted to go and look for an 80s edition of the guardian on ebay

there's always nexis but it's not really real

i have a copy of the hong kong handover issue with this on the front page

http://www.theguardian.com/world/1997/jul/01/china.andrewhiggins

90s Guardian design was fantastic generally as far as I can remember.
I just had a look for 90s editions of the Guardian on ebay and found someone trying to get £6.99 (plus £3.60 postage) for a two page Haim interview that was in the Observer review a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Days-Are-Gone-HAIM-PHOTO-INTERVIEW-UK-GUARDIAN-NEWSPAPER-2013-/271283308948?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item3f29bec994

They're also selling this weeks NME for 7.84 plus £5.89 postage. Is this a common thing? Is the idea that if even the odd person buys one of these every now and again it's worth the time you've invested, considering the prices?

= americans

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/EMPIRE-Magazine-UK-THOR-DARK-WORLD-Loki-TOM-HIDDLESTON-CHRIS-HEMSWORTH-/271274176090

Yeah, I though it might be that (rather than people who could pick it up for a third of the price in their local Asda), still boggling at the idea anyone would pay that much, though.