Guardian Kick Back at Telegraph Crisis Story
The Telegraph has this afternoon published a story claiming that GNM is ‘close to axing the print editions of the Guardian and Observer’. It is a rehash of a blog written on a small advertising website.
I can confirm this is completely untrue.
The newspaper makes up two thirds of our revenue and remains core to our strategy. The figures for going digital only and abandoning print simply don’t add up.
As David pointed out in his email this morning, Guardian content is accessed by 5.8m across print, web and mobile in GB every week – more than any other national quality title, including the Telegraph.
This is something that we should all be incredibly proud of.
Andrew
Surprise at Guardian towers that Telegraph's untrue story about the Guardian is still on the website. Will it run in print?—
Dan Sabbagh (@dansabbagh) October 17, 2012
Rusbridger’s sword of truth has spoken…
All newspapers are going to the wall.
i lick goin in a wall
Dinosaur media
Fucking liar…..then again, what’s new?
Goodbye to the tripe!
Let the Grauniad die.
My pork sword has spoken.
The Guardian is for wiping your arse with. It serves no other purpose.
Bye bye to the rubbish!
Is this blog hellbent on destroying the guardian and the bbc? Is that what you really want?
Yes.
Oh, ok then.
They are parasites. Especially the BBC.
Pedro File apologists at the BBC. Well dodgy!
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-19981556
Meanwhile, the students get dumber by the year!
If the NOtW had to close down for listening to people’s phone calls then surely the BBC should closedown for being peedo/rapist enablist!
“The newspaper makes up two thirds of our revenue” – True but it is also responsible for >90% of the operating losses.
He has 650 journalists and yet the editor has still managed to more than halve its circulation (drop of 51%) since he took over.
As far as I am aware, he is the most unsuccessful editor in the history of UK national press.
Can anyone name any other editor of a national newspaper that has spent so much, yet seemingly achieved so little?
I presume “650″ includes anyone who ever contributes anything to the Grauniad, I can’t imagine them having 650 full-time or even part-time “journalists”.
it’s the editorial bill that cripples them
Re 90percent of losses being due to the print side of the business – that probably includes the journalist salaries which would still be payable under a web only operation?