Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

Funnily enough, I quite like the Guide, partly because Joe Queenan and Byron Coley sometimes write for it, partly because it means I no longer have to buy that useless piece of toss Time Out anymore.

1. The simplification of the accusation may just echo what it asserts about the target (just as 'Dumbing Down' is a dumb, dull phrase);

2. If I don't like Triviality, why don't I read nothing but 10-page reports from the former Yugoslavia? It would be hypocritical of me to say that I simply wanted them to be SERIOUS and SOLEMN and RESPONSIBLE all the time. No, that's not it.

What I mean, I suppose, is that too many features, esp. in G2, now look dashed-off - half-hearted, half-baked, unconvincing, just cliché pies really. Today's Lara Croft piece was just the latest of a million examples. It feels (the terms are problematic here, I know) JOURNALISTIC in a bad way - trite, unconsidered, full of crowd- pleasing Received Ideas - rather than JOURNALISTIC in a good way (that is: dogged, resourceful, brave, mentally agile, snappy and what have you).

It's the world of second-hand Lifestyle phrases that bugs me. The way that adults can still write a phrase like "*that* dress" and not hang their heads in shame.

A rider to all my bile, though, is that my previous, more impressed impressions of the Guardian may just reflect youthful impressionability. (Sentence!) Maybe the same kind of crap used to impress me that now feels rubbishy, faux-zeitgeisty and embarrassing? Maybe, but I suspect it's a bit of both.

I agree about Queenan too. But most of all, I agree about Thomson. There's almost no point having a thread about Thomson, because people who know what they think about him already know it all and would just send in superlatives.

What the paper still has going for it: George Monbiot's column, the Diary, Steve Bell, giving review space to Ians Sansom and Penman, and the tv columns of Nancy Banks-Smith. (When N B-S finally pops her clogs I will have to think very hard about buying the paper.)

What is leading the paper ever closer to the abyss: consistently terrible pop coverage (honorable exceptions: Maddy Costa, Betty Clarke); the fatuous new Saturday mag (Zoe Ball on dressing? match the celebrity with the pet? that awful woman talking about words that should be banned??); Charlotte bloody Raven.

I agree with you there. They sucker you in with the G2 front cover (and the masthead of the main paper), but when you get to read the cover story it often appears cobbled together and lightweight. I imagine it must be difficult to fill that space with high quality stories day in day out though.

I actually like Peter Preston's awkward, staccato opinion pieces, come to think of it. But not the pompous ones of Hugo Young. Freedland is sometimes good at summing political issues up, but usually he 'sums up' too much - there's too much glibness in the way he marshals it all. (I admit again, though, that it's easy - even glib - to call someone glib.)

Penman strikes me as a red herring. I can see that he doesn't do that to you, cos you have some kind of investment in his career. I agree about Sansom (great left-back, mean penalty, blah blah) - in fact I think that the whole Saturday book reviews section is quite possibly the best feature of the paper. EXCEPT of course the footy. Heroes? How could I forget David Lacey?

BUT I think that you are wrong about N B-S. It doesn't surprise me that older folk make that judgement about her; it does rather surprise me coming from you. She has skills, I guess, but she's terribly repetitive; uses the same lines on the same topics year in year out. It's all too - yes - glib and easy, while dressed up to look aged and thus wise.

I only read it for the Guide and the job listings. Not that either has been particularly helpful lately... ;-)

There's a lot of irritating stuff, yes. My favourite columnist is George Monbiot, by a mile. Something I like about the Independent when I do get it is that its liberalism is less metropolitan and more about the common good. Needless to say, though, the Guardian's series of articles on public service under that very title were awesome.

Today's G2 seems designed to add fuel to my (f)ire: one page of 'Style' after another, including a column on Why We're So Disappointed That Madonna Employs A Stylist.

Also good in Guardian: John Patterson re. cinema.

oh god, ask hadley today is just... tooth-grinding.

"today"

"At what age is a man too old to wear band T-shirts?"

Martin McCall, by email

"About 15 - that young enough for you, Martin? And to follow one rhetorical question with several more, what in God's name is the point of band T-shirts anyway? To show your allegiance to a band? Do you think anyone else cares? To impress onlookers with your esoteric musical knowledge? See previous reply. To make people stare at your bony chest? Again, I refer you to the first answer. To show that you once attended a live gig? Wow, like, a pair of golden headsets to the guy in the Nirvana '91 T-shirt. In case you happen to bump into the lead singer on the street, he sees that the two of you are kindred souls and therefore invites you to join his band and you then go on the road and have all the manly bonding sessions followed by groupies that your heart could desire? OK, I'll give you that one, although this does suggest that you still harbour the fantasy that you might bump into Joey Ramone in Waterstone's.

"As for ladies in band T-shirts, give me a fricking break. First, gals, a badly cut, poorly made, oversized T-shirt is good for nothing other than wearing to bed and the gym. Second, too often women who wear band T-shirts appear to be going for what we shall call Groupie Chic. It is a style amply modelled by Kate Moss in recent years, and can pretty much be summed up as skinny faded black jeans, ankle boots, a ripped band T-shirt and a cropped fur jacket. In other words, a girlified version of Marc Bolan's or Keith Richards' wardrobe, as though the woman has been so busy, um, sleeping on the band bus she hasn't had time to clean her clothes, so she's now wearing ones belonging to her musical companion. This column has no time for such nonsense."

Yeah, because women have *no* interest in music whatsoever except for sleeping with musicians. What CENTURY is this cretin from?

I think I stopped wearing band T-shirts by the time I was 23. It wasn't necessarily a conscious move tho. I doubt I will ever wear one again tho - I guess it seems lame unless it's an old obscure or overlooked thus hip act (even this I dunno about). I don't notice many people over 20 wearing them. Does Matt DC still have that Save Ferris T?

I only want to sleep with musicians if they are hot as they are (their musical ability is pretty irrelevant in fact).

dear teh grauniad - a long time ago/we used to be friends...

It went downhill after I left.

or were you PUSHED?

http://homepage.mac.com/alexinnyc/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2007-09-02%2015.37.57%20-0700/Image-D15E03FF59A011DC.jpg

heh. (sorry alex, no harm intended)

http://www.abc.net.au/sport/thesportsdesk/images/200607/20060707henrydive_derblog.jpg

xp

i was being harsh really. i don't care what's on other people's t-shirts that much. just trying to work out why i stopped wearing/wouldn't wear band t-shirts myself.

Any t-shirt which isn't plain white clearly sucks that's why.

i couldn't agree less

I still wear band t-shirts if I like the band. Why not? I don't *define* myself or my personality by my music tastes any more, I haven't done that since I was about 18. But that's not the same thing as wearing a band t-shirt.

I suppose the fashion journalist in discussion cannot fathom the idea that clothes are just something you put on, rather than a definition of or statement about your personality.

This is definitely something that happens as you age - or rather, has happened to me as I aged. There's a subtle difference between Statement Clothes and just things you put on.

Guardian editorial worldview circa 2007:

http://www.astucia.co.uk/images/sce/galibier%20tunnel%20_three.jpg

why else would you buy a band t-shirt if not as a statement or definition of personality?

I didn't know it was a band t-shirt okay?

because you're cold xp

In the past I've usually just bought them as a keepsake of a gig I've enjoyed. The piece tracer quotes is idiotic fluff, obv. I'd be embarrased to admit I'd written that.

Because you like the design? Because you like the music? Because it was given to you (this is where most of mine come from)? Because it was a souvenier?

x-post

you wouldn't actually buy a band t-shirt because you liked the design but not necessarily the band tho...would you?

because you like the music = statement/definition of you/your taste

given to you = not you buying

you wouldn't actually buy a band t-shirt because you liked the design but not necessarily the band tho...would you?

No, plus I've only ever bought them @ gigs.

because you like the music = statement/definition of you/your taste

Probably yeah, but w/smaller bands there's also the knowledge that in buying it, yr helping to supposrt the tour.

i actually bought a comets on fire t-shirt solely because the design was so awesome. (it was at a gig, but they hadn't come on stage yet.) then i heard the music and i liked that too. i suppose if i hadn't liked their music, or thought it was boring, it would have posed a problem.

a friend of mine, who shall remain nameless so that alex in nyc doesn't stalk and kill him, bought a huge iron maiden patch when he was 14 and sewed it across the shoulders of his denim jacket. he had never heard a note of iron maiden, but he wound up becoming the biggest iron maiden fan i know, and even sung in a band later, where his vocal style was almost inseparable from bruce dickinson's.

my take on this: do not read hadley freeman.

this resolution made some time ago, stands as strong today as it ever did.

it's a crass and deliberately invidious piece of writing. such an attitude, if sincerely held, could be turned around on pretty much ANY choice of clothing. so forgeddaboudit

the last band t-shirt i bought - robyn!

alan i can't help myself, i know i'm sick and need help.

is there a thread for best band t-shirts? must see

Taste is something that I have. It does not define me. Clothes are something I wear. The statement I am making is "I don't really care about clothes any more."

If I'm going to make a statement about clothes, I'll wear a bright green paisley jacket to a dronerock festival where everyone else is in leather.

I suppose my Hawkwind t-shirt is a statement, it says "ha ha, I'm wearing a Hawkwind t-shirt, I care nothing for fashion, I am wearing the shirt of a band so deeply uncool you can suck my left one because I love them!" But it's certainly not a statement saying that I want to f*ck any of Hawkwind or that I have a musician boyfriend whose Hawkwind t-shirt I'm borrowing, which is the assumption of that article.

> I don't notice many people over 20 wearing them.

*SOBS*

> you wouldn't actually buy a band t-shirt because you liked the design but not necessarily the band tho...would you?

EAR t-shirt with the putney on the front = great. EAR live = terrible. (EAR on CD = ok, plus pram and stereolab were supporting)

Yes.
https://youtu.be/e1vlLJCr9Lo

lol Dave feat. Alex

14/15 but i work about 30 feet from the Live Lounge. i am ashamed at missing Ava Max. so close.

Lol 7/15, and would have been 6 if not for my sister trying to get me into Lewis Capaldi via his Instagram videos. I know several of the others for non-music reasons, I’m basically Barney meeting David Crosby.

Barney: David Crosby? You're my hero!
David Crosby: Oh, you like my music?
Barney: You're a musician?

— Lars Gotrich 🍷🌊 (@totalvibration) June 16, 2016

Is there really a pop star just called Dave?

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/images/ic/960x540/p01bqjmt.jpg

9/15. I actually knew 3. You could work out on deduction some of them as the names were coming up again..

I am so out of the loop that I didn't realise all the names were actual artist names (at least they were for the end rounds, I assume looking back that they were all the way through) so there were a couple of times I went "well, I didn't think this named artist looked like that, but the other 3 are clearly made up, so here goes!"

xpost Dave La Soul?

/Is there really a pop star just called Dave?/

🖼

10/15 - my downfall, those very interchangeable Gen Z-list long-haired white women, one of which was actually called Becky.

Dave, on the other hand, is super-famous - especially after this year’s Glastonbury coverage.

For a minute there I was down the wrong path, thinking somehow 1/3 of De La Soul was suddenly successful as a solo act in the UK.

Is Dave any good? Looks like the album got good reviews.

yes - he owns

Yes! Really good and very young.

I got 8 but only actually knew billy eilish through memes,dua lipa (why because she look interstin) and capaldi because scottish

A big session hairdresser I’ve known for years (he moved to LA from London about 10 years ago) has been working with Dua Lipa for ages and always shares her latest lewks on FB.

Dave has been excellent for the past two years, but he never seems to get much ILM love.

when my niece (11) was dragged to my booklaunch Q&A in hastings in feb she sat restively at the back as the chat abt 70s and 80s rockwriting droned on UNTIL (her mum afterwards told me) i mentioned dua lipa and her antennae shot up excitedly

so i am down with the kids (=my niece anyway)

i knew abt dave but i think his popname is bad not good despite his music being the opposite

The Dave and fan rapping @ Glasto is one of the few genuinely nice stories of the year.

I played the Dave album yesterday, and it was pretty good. Highlight might have been my kid walking into the room and asking "is this grime?" Kids today ...

This guy?

https://img.discogs.com/DmmlvzcdlG4K757-_KSf-0Hj7ms=/fit-in/600x600/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-10388036-1496481221-4171.jpeg.jpg

king of grime

Looks pretty grimey.

Meridian Dansez

if nothing else, respect to dave’s seo guys who have somehow managed to make what I’d expected to be a challenging google search for his name into the top results

Matt Johnson should hire them.

im dave

— DAVE! (@allahliker) August 14, 2019

dave i'm a fraid dave

https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/patrickstrudwick/two-transgender-employees-quit-guardian-transphobia?utm_source=dynamic&utm_campaign=bfsharetwitter&__twitter_impression=true

oof, that's sad.

good for people to see the actual consequences of the guardian's "we're just asking questions/we like to publish a range of viewpoints" editorial stance which is basically a fig-leaf for pushing an anti-trans agenda.

utm_source=dynamic&utm_campaign=bfsharetwitter&__twitter_impression=false

Lol what is that?

sic does that whenever someone posts a link and hasn't removed the extra referral gubbins off the end. try to think of it as charming

Do embedded twitter posts contain referrer information?

What is referrer info?

Anyway I am charmed sic.

This is interesting timing, a day after that BuzzFeed piece:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/16/im-nicky-bandini-and-im-still-a-sports-writer

> What is referrer info?

the bit of the url that's not necessary to get to the page in question, it tells them who you are or where you've come from or session id or some other information about you.

So things like location? Seems harmless enough

some modernist you are

The one time I don't Google something..

shorter is always better unless it's one of my patreon posts

These are shorter:

This is a badly-photoshopped fake. I’m supposedly the journalist responsible and I never wrote this. It’s a lie. Please delete. It’s being reported.

— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) August 16, 2019

lmao

As long as we’re agreed you’re a liar and a fake. Hope the weather in St Petersburg is nice this summer.

— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) August 16, 2019

It's hilarious shit.

All his journalist mates are up in arms, every single one is being trolled.

Why would the Guardian have a headline in a totally different font and allow a howler such as a hyphen in that headline? Because it’s a crappy fake.

— Jane Merrick (@janemerrick23) August 16, 2019

trolling y/n?

😘

Please don't listen to him, he's a bot account (you can tell fro mthe badly photoshopped picture), I'm the real Peter Walker and I remember writing this

— vinegar tom (@moose_malloy) August 16, 2019

this is all v funny

Peter Walker still, STILL having a thoroughly normal one

My point is that it’s not intended to stand up to any scrutiny, but that people just glancing at it - as happens often on Twitter - could be fooled. Some people told me they initially had been. And as such the intent seems malicious.

— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) August 17, 2019

I think it’s somewhere between. It’s obviously very crude and badly written, and anyone reading it properly would realise. But the faked screenshot and genuine byline are weird, and seem intended to mislead at least initially. I’d say it’s more malicious trolling than parody.

— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) August 17, 2019

It was a joke about St Petersburg, for God’s sake.

— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) August 17, 2019

Easily the best part:

pic.twitter.com/OvDdlc3Lys

— ian mighty (@iammightor) August 16, 2019

losing it at peter walker losing it