Saturday, January 10, 2009

Is the Guardian becoming an internationally renowned publication?

I ask because there's a bit of a moan piece in today's New York Times, entitled Who leaked to The Guardian and Why, with respect to reports that the new Obama administration is willing to talk to Hamas.

Most of the American newspapers are busily denying that there is any fundamental change in policy over Israel/Palestine - but the NYTimes piece also notes that it was the Guardian that broke the news that Hillary Clinton was to be the new Secretary of State and American publications spent a lot of time rubbishing that idea before it was officially announced and it turned out that the Guardian was right.

It's possible that the Guardian has developed close links with someone in the Obama administration, and if so, the next few years will be very interesting indeed. The characteristic of the last eight years has been the primacy of Murdoch's News International media (particularly Fox News), with American papers such as the Washington Post and New York Times being very careful not to upset the Bush Administration (most notably over Iraq). The Guardian by contrast takes a much more robust attitude in criticising governments both British and American (especially over Iraq), and if loads of Americans start to read it because they think they have an inside line to the Obama administration...

I very much hope that is the case. It will be nice to see a British publication really break through to become a major international player, and especially as the Guardian is independently owned by the Scott Trust Limited (formerly the Scott Trust) and is not dominated by a "tycoon" or single personality the way the rest of the British (and American) media is.

6 comments:

broncodelsey said...

Take away the £ 11 million per annum subsidy,that the Guardian receives from New Labour for advertising all those silly public sector non jobs,and you no longer have a viable newspaper.

So only a couple more years to wait for its demise.

Anonymous said...

Can I just say I love your writings and I hope you can come to update your blog more regularly.

Anonymous said...

First time I've agreed with you in ages! ;-)

Quietzapple said...

Agree, hope so.

We don't get a vote in the USA and I am not sure I want the Guardian to have my proxy, but it is wise and about time the UK had this kind of relation to the US.

snowflake5 said...

What a childish comment broncodelsey. The Guardian doesn't receive any "subsidy" from anyone.

The Guardian was featuring public sector job ads in the Thatcher-Major years too. Govt and business advertise where the people they want to reach are. The Guardian also has a big media/arts jobs ads presense.

They are a well-run paper and appear to be outmuscling their rivals in many areas. Good on them.

Anonymous - apologies for not updating the blog for a while. have just been a bit busy. Will try to do better from nopw on.

Danivon said...

I also think that the Graun is quite good for IT job adverts in certain ways. It's how I found my job. Perhaps you need to question whether the Guardian is really being subsidised by Bill Gates and IBM...

And does this mean that the Mail is heavily subsidised by the Franklin Mint? A foreign company!! I shudder to think.