August 14th, 2012

BBC Buys the Guardian More Than Any Other Paper

A Freedom of Information response obtained by The Commentator website has revealed that the BBC buys more copies of the Guardian than any other national newspaper. Nearly 60,000 copies of Rusbridger’s rag could be found in Beeb buildings between April 2010 and February 2011, over 10,000 more than the Daily Mail. That’s despite the Mail having a circulation approaching ten times that of the Guardian. The FOI response and all the BBC‘s newspaper stats can be seen below:

Guido is interested to hear how those who dismiss accusations of the Beeb‘s left-wing bias will spin the latest revelations. For the rest of us, should we really be surprised?


172 Comments

  1. 1
    UKIP.i.am.legend says:

    What matters is not how many copies the BBC bought but why are they buying so many newspapers in the first place? Why should telly-tax payers have to pay for people working at the BBC to have free papers?

    We should also be told what the 1%ers, who make all the major decisions about what goes into their programming, are reading.

    Like

    • 22

      There is a point we may be missing here. Every office, or executive, or perhaps diminutive, will buy a handful of papers each day. They will buy their comfort zone (Grauniad/Indie) and a selection from the following so they can see what the nasty party is getting up to (this constitutes “balance” in their warped sense of values).

      Probably a number of these papers will never get read, if there is some shindig happening, or God forbid, they actually have to deliver something remotely approaching work.

      In my early banking days, each branch office would buy the Times and the Telegraph on the same basis. It wasn’t considered necessary to buy the Daily Worker for balance, then.

      Like

      • 24
        Norman Stanley Fletcher says:

        But the bank you worked for wasn’t funded by the public. Most people who want to read a paper have to buy the paper themselves, so why should the BBC’s staff or other public employees be different?

        Like

        • 36

          They believe it is their divine right so who are we, the little people, to argue with that?

          Lord Reith was an ultra-conservative in many respects (let aside his pro fascist views) – how did it all go so wrong?

          Should have said The Times and the FT BTW. Good grappa last night not yet worn off.

          Like

          • UKIP.i.am.legend says:

            I reckon the BBC buy the the Daily Mail so they can cherry-pick everything that they consider to be bad in it and this is spun to the gullible public in a bad light. If there is anything in the DM they may be in agreement with then it is studiously ignored.

            Like

          • Marxoid Beeboid says:

            how did it all go so wrong?

            Entryism.

            Like

          • I have this sneaking suspicion that if you get too successful in analysing their mindset, you automatically become tainted by it…

            Like

          • Guido's foreskinners masquerading as British says:

            The Eurozone has destroyed the British Semite Banker economy with its dynamic -0.7% growth dragged down by the Nazis’ Arbeit Macht Frei +0.3% economy and Vichy Fascists’ -0.0%! Oy vey!

            Like

          • Mervyn, north London says:

            Oy vey! The price of living is shooting up! More money printing for poor bankers now!

            Like

          • Beeboid One says:

            The Guardian is our bible / little red book, and every day on radio 4 news programmes we undertake to mention it and its news at least twice in every news programme.
            The Daily Mail is a vile newspaper geared to the working classes and we only mention it when it agrees with our agenda or to villify it.
            The Independent is our second choice.

            Like

          • Threesome's rule.... says:

            .
            .
            being tainted…is a very good point SC. ……does that imply that we have soft boundaries? better not be tainted than being I guess …if one wants to retain one’s individuality…
            .
            my own emerging view is that to get a best out of a situation for ourselves we need to look at 3 aspects.

            Like

        • 40
          Anonymous says:

          Anything but the Daily Mong.

          Like

        • 164
          Anonymous says:

          Maybe it’s a good idea that people at the BBC read what’s in the papers. Part their job even.

          Do you think people at the Nail don’t read what their competitors are producing?

          Like

      • 35
        Fish says:

        Perhaps the BBC could now go on and tell us, in the last year, how many Guardian / Observer / Independent journalists and contributors have been invited on their TV / Radio programmes, compared with those from other papers.

        I suspect that Owen Jones’ appearances alone, have exceeded all those of the Times, Telegraph and others put together.

        Like

      • 114
        austerity rules.. says:

        .
        .
        for the greatest good?….how far is the beeb from the centre?
        .
        is there overall balance when we combine sky and the Beeb?
        .
        what is the BBC remit?

        Like

  2. 2
    BBC News says:

    And where the hell are we supposed to get our News?

    Like

  3. 3
    Anonymous says:

    “more than the Daily Mail”

    But the Mail has so little to say, and it says it so often.

    Like

  4. 4
    Glyn H says:

    So if the Guardian has a circulation of about 200,000 the BBC buys more than 25%?
    Conflict of interest? But of course that does not matter in lefty circles does it?

    Like

    • 15
      Mr Helpful says:

      The Graudian may be doing badly, but I think it sells more than 200,000 copies per year.

      Like

    • 19
      A Socialist says:

      As long as the interest is correct and worthy enough, anything goes.

      We mean it. Poverty, misery, mass graves – it’s all good as long as the goal is deemed worthy, as defined by us.

      Like

      • 31
        UKIP.i.am.legend says:

        When watching the Tour de France it was interesting how the different people in each team had different roles. Some were sprinters, others hill-climbers, others dogs-body pacemen. Were it up to socialists, each member of their team would have to be treated equally and all share the work-load equally, while their best sprinter would face some kind of handicap for being so good. So would that team stand any chance of winning if the other teams carried on as they do now?
        And it is no different with the economy. The more equal we become, the more the top companies and earners are taxed and handicapped, the worse the country becomes in relation to the rest of the world. We are seeing it with low growth, here and in the rest of Eurodisneyland. Only Germany with its massive advantage in being able to sell goods (because its currency is artificially much lower than it should be) is benefiting.

        Like

        • 61
          smoggie says:

          Yes only one country needs to leave the Euro club – Germany, which is artificially keeping the value of the Euro high.

          Like

          • Norman Stanley Fletcher says:

            No chance of that. Merkel has too much political capital invested in the entire EU project.

            Like

    • 58
      bergen says:

      Those figures are absolutely staggering. This is taxpayers money not their own. No commercial business would replicate it.Why so many copies? A fraction would suffice for the various newsrooms. They can pay for the rest themselves. Most of us have to pay for things (an alien concept for the public sector believers in the money tree).

      Like

      • 90
        Backwoodsman says:

        Agree totally, how can you ever even think to justify buying that many copies of newspapers ! No sane business ever would – this is an obscene example of tax payers money being wasted thoughtlessly .
        The scale of waste is actually a bigger story than the inevitable bias towards the guardian.
        What do their 3,000 ‘journalists’ do, simply copy stories from other papers ?

        Like

      • 100
        Norman Stanley Fletcher says:

        They could always buy one copy per location and then photocopy articles as required. That might be against some copyright law, but who’s going to grass? Besides, the Graun probably has plenty of form for fraud, plagiarism, etc.

        Like

    • 101
      Tootingbec is not a sexual act says:

      Maths obviously not your strong point.

      Like

    • 162
      Anonymous says:

      Of course they don’t. Readtge article properly.

      Like

  5. 5
    JH says:

    These people really, actually believe that their worldview is the ‘correct’ one and anything that deviates from this is horrid and nasty.

    This is why they claim to be ‘unbiased’ – they are the correct ones, anyone who disagrees is a racist little englander zenophobe colonel blimp daily mail sun reading horrendously white nobody.

    Like

  6. 6
    Chris McDonald says:

    Why on earth would anybody wish to buy the Daily Mail?? Equally, why are we wasting people’s time finding out which is the most purchased paper by the BBC?
    Which newspaper is purchased in Guido Towers?
    Chris McDonald
    Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

    Like

  7. 8
    Anonymous says:

    Never mind how many copies of the different papers the BBC buys; a more interesting and revealing statistic (and I can’t be bothered to work it out – one for Guido perhaps?) is what proportion of each paper’s daily output is bought by the BBC?

    Like

  8. 9
    northofsouth says:

    Mother’s milk to them. They’re in fact interchangeable

    Like

  9. 9
    Alre*ády the m#d#b#o*t's going nu##ts says:

    I take it those 60,000 co*p#i*és the BBC b*uys for its stá*ff are ta*xed as a be*nefít in k#nd.

    (6th attempt to post this ultra-contr#oversial comm#ent).

    Like

  10. 14
    Polly Toynbee says:

    I shall utilise the Freedom Of Information Act to determine the name/s and address that has been “blacked out” in the letter from the BBC.

    Seig Heil !

    Like

  11. 28
    I don't need no doctor says:

    If the BBC is a independantly thinking news organisation, then why does it favour the Guardian word so much?

    Like

  12. 29
    JH says:

    This means that about 1/500th of the Guardian’s daily print run goes straight to magical uniquely-funded-money-on-trees BBC-land.

    Which is fucking ludicrous if you think about it.

    Enjoy your time in the sun, you sanctimonious, ignorant lefty bastards.

    Not that you’d dream of reading the Sun, of course. Ugh. Horrid, nasty, staggeringly popular rag.

    Like

    • 37
      Alre*ády the m#d#b#o*t's going nu##ts says:

      I wonder how many additional copies are bought by Lefty councils and publicly-funded “third sector” nonentities..

      Like

  13. 32
    Roscoe Rules says:

    The BBC not just buy the Guardian but make programs about last years riots based on evidence gathered by the Guardian as well.
    The good bit though was that the truth did out.
    Most of the rioters didn’t give a fuck about anything political and were just out to rob.
    And judging by the accents of the some of the white rioters depicted Dave Starkey was fucking right as well.

    Like

    • 43
      Labour-educated white chav with 20 GCSEs says:

      Yo, you motherf****r! We was well bangin n shit! We were like ragin’ against da man, against the state and that innit. Rebelin’ right innit.

      It was our rage n expression of like well anger n that, cos Tory scum government stops us like well gettin’ jobs n shit.

      Respect. Word. etc etc etc.

      Like

      • 51
        Roscoe Rules says:

        Chill blud me no mean to dis U an ting I was jus sayin.Peace out.

        Like

      • 86
        JH says:

        Nonsense. The riots were due to the withdrawal of the EMA.

        Chuckle.

        Typing that, it is staggering to think that Labour had the balls to try that one on. Someone needs to smash up their HQ, see how they like it.

        Want to stop the next disturbance like this? Simple. Set the police loose on them, with a briefing that they are to ‘go Harwood’ on the bad ass of anyone caught red handed.

        If that fails, let the Army ventilate a couple of rioters, and see if Leroy wants to discover if his converted Brocock is a match for an SA80.

        Like

        • 104
          Roscoe Rules says:

          At the conclusion of the program they tried to say there were many factors for the riots but the evidence was clear and from the horses mouth so to speak.
          It was mostly pure criminality that drove the riots.
          Now being as the program was made by the BBC and based on evidence gathered by the Guardian and the London School of Economics we can assume anything Labour has to say on the contrary must be shit.

          Like

  14. 33
    IanVisits says:

    Rather than spinning the story as a Mail vs Guardian and claiming that a fairly small percentage swing to the Guardian is proof of left-wing bias.

    …why not look at the whole chart on the website you linked to.

    Collectively, sales of the Telegraph, Times and Sun vastly outnumber sales of the Guardian and Independent.

    Presumably you will see this as proof of a right wing bias?

    Like

    • 41
      UKIP.i.am.legend says:

      It doesn’t matter a toss how many copies are bought. What matters is what the 1%ers who make all the decisions about what goes into their programs read.

      Like

    • 46
      Fish says:

      No. It’s what they do with the papers that count. The Guardian and Independent are used as their reference tool. The rest probably go straight into the recycling bin.

      Like

    • 53
      smoggie says:

      If you are comparing two against three then of course your maths are biased. Add in the numbers for the Daily Mirror for a proper comparison (3 vs 3) and you will still see a left wing bias.

      Like

    • 82
      cumuluscognizance says:

      If you repeat a lie enough times it will be come the truth. Well done son….

      Like

  15. 38
    Andy Coulson's monkey says:

    The Gruaniad has a proper specialist media section. The Daily Kampf does not.

    Like

  16. 50
    Legal Crook says:

    If you did enough FOI you would probably find, that adding all the bBC, gov and council bought copies, that the Gruniad is state funded!

    Like

    • 67
      JH says:

      It would be interesting to see what percentage of the claimed circulation is voluntarily paid for at news-stands or by subscription, by people handing over their own money.

      It would not surprise me if it was less than 30%.

      Despite the remaining ‘default’ custom it still needs vast gobs of cash injecting from a successful (tax avoiding) private enterprise to stay afloat.

      How very socialist.

      Like

      • 109
        Norman Stanley Fletcher says:

        I think I read somewhere that roughly 40,000 copies a day are bought by individuals using their own money, but most of them are probably public employees, so they’re still spending our money. I believe there’s a rise in the number on Wednesday (?), when most of the public sector non-jobs are advertised. I wonder how many copies are bought by people in the private sector. Not many, I bet.

        Like

    • 75
      Tristram Smallbore-ffipps says:

      True of most papers. The Murdoch and Mail empires are funded through the tax breaks and avoidance used by their parent companies.

      Like

      • 93
        JH says:

        A tax break is not a subsidy.

        Repeat, a tax break is not a subsidy.

        The Guardian is subsidised by the GMG, using profits from Auto Trader. It would promptly go bust otherwise.

        Like

        • 102
          Tristram Smallbore-ffipps says:

          If a tax break is not a subsidy you tell that to the various FTSE companies who buy targets just to obtain their tax benefits. Subsidies come in many forms and what you call them matters little. The question is whether they can be justified for the benefit they bring – and most tax breaks cannot, so they are subsidies.

          Like

          • JH says:

            Letting people keep more of their own money is not a subsidy, any more than a mugger only taking £10 of the £20 in my pocket is being ‘generous’.

            It would really, really benefit me if you send me £10,000 every month. Does it make it right?

            The private sector does not exist for the benefit of the public one, no matter how pleasant that would make life in your rarefied little world.

            Like

        • 144
          Tootingbec is not a sexual act says:

          Of course a tax break is a subsidy. Any reduction in the amount of tax you pay through the provision of an allowance from the Treasury is a subsidy. Blimey it’s not a difficult concept to grasp that you pay less of your profits in tax because somebody else is contributing more of theirs.

          Like

          • La Fold says:

            Definiton of subsidy

            1. A sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service.

            2. A sum of money granted to support an arts organization or other undertaking held to be in the public interest.

            So youre argument doesnt hold up either to the definiton of a subsidy or even a dictionary definiton of a subsidy. Also it makes the baseless assumption that if you are given a tax break others are tax more harshly to make up the deficit.

            Like

  17. 52

    Neanderthals did not interbreed with humans, scientists find DT

    Presumably they did not sample Essex?

    Like

  18. 56
    smoggie says:

    Why are these BBC oiks sitting around reading newspapers all day anyway?

    Like

  19. 59
    The Office Of David Cameron says:

    Under the Freedom Of Information Act we can confirm that Lady Gaga has to requested a meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron next month.

    Over and Out.

    Like

    • 70
      Alre*ády the m#d#b#o*t's going nu##ts says:

      “Over and Out.”

      “Over and Out” is a Holly*wood invention. “Over” means handing over to the other party to receive their transmission. “Out” means you have finished the conversation. You don’t say both.

      (5th attempt to post this ultra-controversial comm#ent).

      Like

    • 131
      The Bottle Fed Triplet says:

      Over and Out? Where did you acquire your RT skills, from old war films? Where I come from, use of that particular solecism over the ether would result in a beer fine or at worst, a rocket from the old man. Numpty!

      Like

  20. 64
    sixupman says:

    They must all have been well entertained by Branson as the excessive positive plugs concerning his VirginRail operation.

    Like

    • 68
      Tristram Smallbore-ffipps says:

      In the Virgin empire the phrase “excessive positive plug” normally refers to a malfunction in the vibrators that the serial groper likes to use on selected staff members.

      Like

  21. 66
    Tristram Smallbore-ffipps says:

    You are all missing the obvious. Of course the number of Daily Mail copies is lower. To read it you have to be over 85, which restricts it’s role with the employed.

    Like

    • 149
      Biased Broadcasting Corporation says:

      Whereas to get the full brainwashing effect of the Guardian, you have to be under 25.

      Like

  22. 69
    Old Tpry Bigot says:

    The Guardian and the Independent are nearly always the first titles mentioned whenever the BBC ‘take a look at the papers’.

    It is as if their massive circulations and obvious importance means they must be heard before the likes of the Telegraph, or God forbid, the Mail.

    Like

    • 150
      Biased Broadcasting Corporation says:

      That’s absolutely correct. The Guardian, Independent and the i are always first. It’s the Biased Broadcasting Corporation that tells us they’re important. Nobody else thinks so.

      Like

  23. 74
    Grollace says:

    Taxpayer-funded Socialism. Where is my wretching bowl.

    Like

  24. 78
    Disorientator says:

    This is a period of 10 months. Divide the numbers by the days and it suddenly becomes a little less impressive

    Like

  25. 83
    Widescreen2010 says:

    Oddly enough, the Grauniad’s business section is rather good.
    Actually better than the Times or Telegraph.
    Business staff are probably ignored and left to get on with it without interference.

    Like

    • 88
      Old Tory Bigot says:

      That’s a bit like “I only read the Sun for the sport”.

      Like

    • 116
      Pundit Too says:

      The only really good part of the Gruniard is the food and wine section.
      Custom built for the champagne socialists that it employs and who are its customers.

      Like

  26. 84
    Disorientator says:

    And its a little beneath you Guido, to compare the Guardian to the Mail. By all means dislike the Guardian, and compare its figures to one of the quality right wing broadsheets, but you might as well say they bought more Guardians than they did toothbrushes, for all the similarities between the papers

    Like

    • 91
      Old Tory Bigot says:

      Presumably you disorient your victimgs by spinning.

      Like

    • 111
      Norman Stanley Fletcher says:

      Which right wing broadsheets? THe Failygraph often reads like a paler pink version of the Graun these days when I see it, and that’s been going on for some years.

      Like

  27. 85
    One Eyed Faery Quene of Kirkcaldy says:

    And bears sh*t in the woods. Are we supposed to be surprised?

    Like

  28. 87
    169995 says:

    Having just read a selection of newspapers for free on my laptop . I wonder why the BBC are paying for paper copies that are not as up to date as their electronic counterparts . Have they heard of the internet at BBC towers ??

    Like

    • 152
      Biased Broadcasting Corporation says:

      Very good point. It’s just that if they don’t squander the licence fee on stuff they don’t need in the first place, they can’t say they’re starved of cash, can they?

      Like

  29. 92
    Anonymous says:

    look at the total numbr of copies of the Telegraph and Times that were bought- over 100,000. How do you explain that in your “the beeb’s left-wing bias” analysis?

    Like

  30. 95
    Old Tory Bigot says:

    More joyless defeatism from La Toynbee today: –

    “For the coalition, Olympic cheer will quickly subside”

    Fuck off you dismal old witch!

    Like

  31. 97
    Nonjob says:

    The Guardian will go bust in a year or so. People need to stop paying their licence fee so that the BBC goes the same way.

    Like

  32. 98
    notleft says:

    This just goes on with the BBC & its biased, this story from last year just about sums it up for me.

    Left-wing bias? It’s written through the BBC’s very DNA, says Peter Sissons

    Like

  33. 99
    chris says:

    So, I guess the Guardian is publicly funded, as it seems our licence fee is being used to help keep it afloat!

    Like

  34. 107
    Hang The Bastards says:

    The BBC is UNFIT FOR PURPOSE

    Shut the propaganda machine down. We don’t need to pay for the lefty shite it spouts. There is huge choice on the Telly that we pay for already.

    Like

  35. 115
    Anonymous says:

    Taking account of the daily sales figures for 2011 (average in January) from Wikepedia, and then dividing the BBC figures by 11 (the number of months the FOI period covered) and again dividing by 20 (to exclude weekends).

    These are the percentages relating to BBC purcahses vs daily sales of said papers.

    %
    The Sun 0.006
    The Daily Mail 0.010
    The Daily Mirror 0.014
    The Daily Telegraph 0.034
    The Times 0.051
    Daily Star 0.009
    Daily Express 0.018
    The Guardian 0.097
    Daily Record 0.002
    The Independent 0.107

    Like

    • 117
      Pundit Too says:

      They surely only buy more of the Independent than the Gruniard because of its name?

      Like

      • 122
        cough says:

        % of circulation

        Like

        • 140
          Anonymous says:

          % of circulation, as opposed to readership.

          Like

          • cough says:

            are you inferring some papers’ readers have larger families ?

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            Fecked if I know… There are 2 different sets of figures available, and one refers to circulation and the other to readership.

            In a lot of cases, the readership is near enough double. In the case of the Guardian, it is pretty much quadruple. Perhaps that is why they’re so skint. The lefties are too tight to buy their own papers.

            Like

  36. 118
    Mr Gove A.K.A Pob says:

    Yes Gweedo

    The Grauniad is a rag and the Star on Sunday is a newspaper.

    Of course.

    Like

  37. 121
    Anonymous says:

    Public sector waste …..

    Like

  38. 124
    Mr Gove A.K.A Pob says:

    Yes Gweedo,

    The Grauniad is a rag and the St.ar on Su.nday is a newspaper.

    Serious journalism versus the infinite monkey cage echo chamber of bullshit that is most blogs (this one included)

    Of course.

    Like

  39. 125
    Nobby Clark says:

    Grumbling about it here won’t change a damn thing.

    Like

  40. 126
    Major Plonquer says:

    There may be a perfectly logical explanation for this. For example, perhaps in an effort to cut costs the BBC has ordered its staff to wipe their arses with newspaper instead of toilet paper. In which case the Guardian would be the logical choice.

    Like

  41. 127
    genghiz the kahn says:

    It must be the special perfumed, perforated, soft, and absorbent editions of The Guardian.

    Like

  42. 128
    illogical says:

    Surprised that most here [including Guido] have missed the obvious. The Left wing bias at the BBC which is already overflowing at the gills does not require any extra brainwashing info supplied by the Guardian to keep their sheep toeing the line. I doubt if any read it.
    Any quick glance at CBBC the kiddies programs will conclude that model making and the use of paper maché makes up the major part of their ideas to keep the kids amused and swell the sales of the Socialist rag. This week, it’s the Usain Bolt pose that is doing the rounds.
    Perhaps presenters have found that the extra sh*t contained in Guardian copy is advantageous in producing the required mixture and attempting to contour Bolt’s torso and appendages with a cut up page three bare breast from another publication does not work so well.

    Like

    • 130
      genghiz the kahn says:

      Add on the number of Guardian journalists who happen to be available for comment on tv and radio, funny how other papers rarely get a look in.

      As Bill Quango MP pointed out just move the Guardian up to BBC Salford, and it gets back to its roots, and cohabits with its soul mates in broadcasting.

      Like

  43. 132
    david says:

    remember that the guardian endorsed the lib dems at thr last election so tories should be grateful.

    Like

  44. 143
    Jimmy says:

    The fact that they buy more copies of the Sun than the Mirror is clear evidence of right wing bias.

    Like

    • 145
      Anonymous says:

      But as a percentage of National Circulation, it is far less:

      The Sun 0.006
      The Daily Mirror 0.014

      Over to you………..

      Like

      • 154
        Jimmy says:

        Fair enough. They buy 230,000 rightie papers and 140,000 leftie ones. Clearly biased.

        Like

        • 156
          Anonymous says:

          So by your reckoning, anything that isn’t the Guardian, Independant or Mirror (Record) then it is right wing? Or perhaps I should include the Daily Star, but then your figures wouldn’t add up…….

          Still, using your split as an example and then applying it back to the earlier percentages.
          As a percentage of newspaper circulation, the BBC buys 0.068% lefty rags vs 0.043 rightwing ones.

          Clearly biased.

          Like

          • Jimmy says:

            Why as a percentage of circulation? All that proves is that the papers are more biased than the beeb.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            no, what it proves is that the majority of te population would rather read anything but the Guardian or Independant…..

            Yet the BBC bucks that trend, and pretty much goes the other way. Hardly representative of the British people is it?

            Like

          • Jimmy says:

            Moe representative then the press but still too skewed to the right.

            Like

  45. 158
    The Duke of Croydon says:

    Would it be right to assume that this figure doesnt include free Guardian newspapers delivered to the beeb.
    Id be ever so surprised if there wasnt van loads dropped off at Media City of a morning.

    Like

  46. 166
    Tim Williamson says:

    We should always remember that the Guardian is the “in-house” newspaper of all taxpayer funded operations. That includes the BBC, NHS, all the Social Services departments, all educational establishments. It’s reciprocal — the Guardian is — or used to be until online recruitment spoiled things — the newspaper where over 90% of all recruitment advertising was placed. So, a nice little earner for the Guardian and nicely-politically-compatible recruits to join leftist empire. It’s also why those various organisations will vehemently defend the interests of the others. They are all cut from the same cloth. And the taxpayer is funding the lot of them.

    Like

  47. 169

    1329294 left wing newspapers to 227614 right wing newspapers. A clear left wing bias.

    Like

  48. 170
    TheWalrus says:

    So the figures actually show that BBC buys alot more conservative papers than ‘left-wing’ ones. Communists!

    Like


Media Reader

Sun Victory in Court | MediaGuido
Journalists in the Dock | David Banks
Sainsbury’s Disowns Left-Wing Blogger | Mail
New Improved Internships, Fellowships! | NY Times
Mirror’s ‘UKIP Goggles’ App Backfires | Press Gazette
Guardian’s IPSO Alternative Less Independent | Press Gazette
BBC Still Ignoring Savile Evidence | Telegraph
Mosley Offered Labour £1 Million | Indy
BBC: It Was Guido Wot Won It | MediaGuido
Nick Robinson’s Britain First Selfie | Metro
Endless Hypocrisy of Russell Brand | Speccie


Find out more about PLMR AD-MS


Tony Blair threatens Ed:

“If you had a strong political lead that was combining the politics of aspiration with the politics of compassion, I still think that’s where you could get a substantial majority…  If I ever do an interview on [the state of the Labour Party], it will have to be at length…”



Left on Left says:

The lefties are attacking because the panellist is a millionaire and lives in a London home worth upwards of two million. Someone had best tell them he’s called Ed Miliband.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,610 other followers