Half of UK adults still get their news from newspaper brands; BBC One most important - Ofcom

Sounds about right. More right than Metro Online.

EDIT: Let me add that the letters' page tries to reflect diverse readership but the news is more right leaning.

Has anyone ever got a response/date from their commuters lovers section (or whatever it’s called) on the letters page?

KK wrote:Has anyone ever got a response/date from their commuters lovers section (or whatever it’s called) on the letters page?

Asking for a friend?

That I don't know!

KK wrote:Has anyone ever got a response/date from their commuters lovers section (or whatever it’s called) on the letters page?

Apparently so.

https://metro.co.uk/2013/04/19/metros-r ... l-3653882/

Mafro wrote:

KK wrote:Has anyone ever got a response/date from their commuters lovers section (or whatever it’s called) on the letters page?

Asking for a friend?

WHY DON’T THEY RESPOND?!!

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

I imagine much of the reader base for newspapers is over 60

Personally, I get my news from Facebook, from a combination of left wing and right wing echo chambers. It's an interesting dichotomy.

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

The lack of political engagement you see now in many working class populations was deliberately induced. Class consciousness was undermined by the destruction of working class communities in the latter half of the last century, and the bourgeois capitalists in the centrist and right-wing press now work to misinform the working class and prevent class consciousness from re-emerging. As hard as it is to reach them and educate them in the face of such powerful neoliberal propaganda, that's our job as leftists. Socialism requires an engaged and educated proletariat, we have to build that.

Good luck with that.

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

Preezy wrote:Good luck with that.

I don't know why you're always so snarky, but "thanks" I guess. I don't think we will see significant progress in my lifetime, in fact I think things will get worse, but you've got to know what you stand for and try to act on it in some small, individual way, whether that's going to a protest with some friends, or chatting to co-workers, or even shit-posting online.

Karl_ wrote:

Preezy wrote:Good luck with that.

I don't know why you're always so snarky, but "thanks" I guess.

No snark intended, I find your optimism endearing

Preezy wrote:No snark intended, I find your optimism endearing

Ah okay, I misread the tone, my bad. I know you don't take online politics discussions as seriously as I do (probably a good thing! ) and I assumed you were being sarcy there.

(Not your fault but I have trouble reading tone sometimes in general, I am a bit "socially awkward" as I'm sure everyone knows! )

Re: optimism, it's funny, I'm not very consistent, I have a very optimistic view of the far future (I think these ideas will prevail one day!) but a very pessimistic view of the near future (Nazis and climate change will kill us all!).

Karl_ wrote:

Preezy wrote:No snark intended, I find your optimism endearing

Ah okay, I misread the tone, my bad. I know you don't take online politics discussions as seriously as I do (probably a good thing! ) and I assumed you were being sarcy there.

(Not your fault but I have trouble reading tone sometimes in general, I am a bit "socially awkward" as I'm sure everyone knows! )

Re: optimism, it's funny, I'm not very consistent, I have a very optimistic view of the far future (I think these ideas will prevail one day!) but a very pessimistic view of the near future (Nazis and climate change will kill us all!).

I can see how it would come across as snarky, that's not your fault. I do often feel like people trying to "change the world" online are just pissing into the wind, I've probably just watched Hypernormalisation too much . But you're doing far more than me to influence change in others, so credit to you (and Taf, but don't tell the SJW bed-wetter I said that).

I've actually been watching a lot of Mr Rogers' Neighbourhood episodes with my daughter on youtube this week (she loves it) and well, gosh darn-it he was just the nicest human being, very inspiring. Also his intro song is catchy as strawberry float, I love it. I'm trying to be a better person, it's far easier to be a shitbag (in my opinion), so I'm making the effort to be friendlier and kinder in general. We'll see how long it lasts

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.