''The Guardian'' is a British newspaper owned by the Guardian Media Group. It is a serious broadsheet newspaper published Monday–Saturday, with relatively left wing politics. Until 1959 it was called ''The Manchester Guardian'', reflecting its provincial origins: the paper is still sometimes referred to by this name, especially in North America. ''The Guardian'' has a newspaper circulation of around 345,000 copies (Jul-Dec 2004) [http://media.guardian.co.uk/presspublishing/tables/0,7680,1393113,00.html], which compares with other UK serious daily newspaper sales of 867,000 for the ''Daily Telegraph'', 616,000 for ''The Times'', and 226,000 for ''The Independent''. The paper is sometimes known as ''The Grauniad'' (coined by ''Private Eye''), as a result of frequent typographical errors for which it became infamous, although these are now uncommon. Their ''Guardian Unlimited'' web site won the Best Newspaper category in the 2005 Webby Awards, beating the ''New York Times'', the ''Washington Post'', the ''Wall Street Journal'' and ''Variety''. [http://www.webbyawards.com/webbys/current.php#webby_entry_newspaper] ==Ownership== ''The Guardian'' is part of the Guardian Media Group of newspapers, radio stations, and new media including ''The Observer'' Sunday newspaper, the ''Manchester Evening News'', and ''Guardian Unlimited'', one of the most popular online news resources on the Internet. All the aforementioned are owned by The Scott Trust, a charitable foundation which aims to ensure the newspaper's editorial independence in perpetuity, maintaining its financial health to ensure it does not become vulnerable to take over by for-profit media groups, and the serious compromise of editorial independence that this often brings. The ''Guardian'' and its parent groups are a participant in Project Syndicate [http://www.project-syndicate.org/], established by George Soros, and intervened in 1995 to save the ''Mail & Guardian'' in South Africa [http://www.mg.co.za/], but Guardian Media Group sold the majority of its shares in the ''Mail & Guardian'' in 2002. == History == The ''Manchester Guardian'' was founded in Manchester in 1821 by a group of non-conformist businessmen headed by John E. Taylor. The prospectus which announced the new publication proclaimed that "it will zealously enforce the principles of civil and religious Liberty … it will warmly advocate the cause of Reform; it will endeavour to assist in the diffusion of just principles of Political Economy; and to support, without reference to the party from which they emanate, all servicable measures." The first edition was published on May 5, 1821, at which time the ''Guardian'' was a weekly, published on Saturdays; the stamp duty on newspapers (4penny. per sheet) forced the price up so high that it was uneconomic to publish more frequently. When the stamp duty was cut in 1836 the ''Guardian'' added a Wednesday edition; with the abolition of the tax in 1855 it became a daily paper. Its most famous editor, Charles Prestwich Scott, made the ''Manchester Guardian'' into a nationally famous newspaper. He was editor for 57 years from 1872, and became its owner when he bought the paper from the estate of Taylor's son in 1907. Under Scott the paper's moderate editorial line became more radical, supporting Gladstone when the Liberals split in 1886, and opposing the Boer War against popular opinion. In June 1936, to avoid death duty, ownership of the paper was passed to the Scott Trust (named after the last owner, John Russell Scott, who was the first chairman of the Trust). The paper was then noted for its eccentric style, its moralising and its detached attitude to its finances. Traditionally affiliated with the centrist Liberal Party (UK), and with a northern circulation base, the paper earned a national reputation and the respect of the left during the Spanish Civil War, when along with the now defunct ''News Chronicle'' it was the only UK source of news that was not tainted by support for the insurgent nationalists led by General Francisco Franco. In 1959 the paper dropped "Manchester" from its title, becoming simply ''The Guardian'', and 1964 it moved to London, losing some of its regional agenda but continuing to be heavily subsidised by sales of the less intellectual but much more profitable ''Manchester Evening News''. The financial position remained extremely poor into the 1970s; at one time it was in merger talks with ''The Times''. The paper consolidated its left-wing stance during the 1970s and 1980s but was both shocked and revitalised by the launch of ''The Independent'' in 1986 which competed for similar readers and provoked the entire broadsheet industry into a fight for circulation. In 1988 ''The Guardian'' had a significant redesign; as well as improving the quality of its printers ink, it also changed its masthead. In 1992 it relaunched its features section as "G2", a tabloid-format supplement. This innovation was widely copied by the other "quality" broadsheets, and ultimately led to the rise of "compact" papers and ''The Guardian'''s planned move to the Berliner format. In 1993 the paper declined to participate in the broadsheet 'price war' started by Rupert Murdoch's ''The Times''. Also in 1993, ''The Guardian'' bought ''The Observer'' from Lonrho, thus gaining a serious Sunday newspaper partner with similar political views. In 1995, both the Granada Television program World In Action and ''The Guardian'' were sued for libel by the then cabinet minister Jonathan Aitken, for their allegation that the Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Fahd had paid for Aitken and his wife to stay at the Htel Ritz Paris in Paris, which would have amounted to accepting a bribe on Aitken's part. Aitken publically stated he would fight with "the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play" [http://www.guardian.co.uk/aitken/Story/0,2763,208516,00.html]. The court case proceeded, and in 1997 ''The Guardian'' produced evidence that Aitken's claim of his wife paying for the hotel stay was untrue. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/aitken/Story/0,2763,208503,00.html] In 1999, Aitken was jailed for perjury and perverting the course of justice. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/258070.stm] During the History of Afghanistan since 1992#U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and 2003 invasion of Iraq ''The Guardian'' attracted a significant proportion of anti-war readers as one of the mass-media media outlets most critical of UK and USA military initiatives. The newspaper also gained readers in the United States where there were few "anti-war" rivals. Its international weekly edition is now titled ''The Guardian Weekly'', though it retained the title ''Manchester Guardian Weekly'' for some years after the home edition had moved to London. It includes sections from a number of other internationally significant newspapers of a somewhat left-of-centre inclination, including ''Le Monde''. In 2004, ''The Guardian'' introduced an online digital version of its print edition, allowing readers to download pages from the last 14 issues as a portable document format files. In August 2004, for the U.S. presidential election, 2004, the daily "G2" supplement, edited by Ian Katz, launched an experimental letter-writing campaign in Clark_County%2C_Ohio, Ohio, a small county in a swing state. Katz bought a voter list from the county for $25 and asked people to write to those on the list undecided in the election. The point of this venture was for the writers to give Clark County voters a taste of international opinion, without endorsing any candidates. This caused something of a backlash, and on the 21st October, the paper retired the campaign. The Guardian also has a series of talkboards based on WebX technology that are noted for their mix of political disussion and whimsy. They are spoofed in the ''Guardian's'' own regular humorous ''Chatroom'' column in G2. == Moving to the Berliner == In 2004, ''The Guardian'' announced plans to change to a "Berliner (format)" or "midi (newspaper)" format similar to that used by ''Le Monde'' in France and some other European papers; at 470×315 mm, this is slightly larger than a traditional tabloid. Planned for the autumn of 2005 (some have suggested Monday 5 September 2005 as the starting date), this change is either a response to, or has the same cause as, the moves by ''The Times'' and ''The Independent'' to start publishing in tabloid (or "compact") format. The advantage that ''The Guardian'' sees in the Berliner format is that though it is little wider than a tabloid, and is thus equally easy to read on public transport, its greater height gives more flexibility in page design. An article in the ''Independent on Sunday'', dated January 30 2005, suggested that the move may be fraught with problems. As of January 2005, no printing press in the UK can produce newspapers in the Berliner format. One of the Guardian's presses is part owned by groups responsible for ''The Daily Telegraph'' and ''The Daily Express'' who would likely require compensation if ''The Guardian'' pulls out. It is contracted to use the plant until 2009. Another press is shared with the Guardian Media Group's north western local tabloid papers, which do not wish to switch to the Berliner format. ''The Guardian'' is rumoured to be spending over 65 million on the project as a whole. ''The Guardian'' has now confirmed rumours of an earlier launch date than their original plans for 2006, saying ''The Guardian'' will relaunch in the new format in the autumn with the Observer following in early 2006. The papers will be the first UK nationals able to print in full colour on every page. ==Supplements== On a weekday ''The Guardian'' comes with the G2 supplement containing feature articles, columns, television and radio listings and the quick crossword. Other regular supplements during the week include: *Monday: MediaGuardian, Office Hours, Sport *Tuesday: EducationGuardian *Wednesday: SocietyGuardian (covers the British public sector and related issues) *Thursday: Life (covers science), Online *Friday: Friday Review (covers music and film) *Saturday: The Guide (a weekly listings magazine), Weekend (the colour supplement), Review (covers literature), Jobs & Money, Travel, Sport Though the main news section is still in the large broadsheet format, the supplements are all in the half-sized tabloid format, with the exception of the glossy Weekend section which is a 290×245mm magazine and The Guide which is in a small 225×145mm format. ==''The Guardian'' in the popular imagination== The affectionate name the ''Grauniad'' for the paper came about because, in the past, it was noted for frequent text mangling, technical typesetting failures and typographical errors, including once misspelling its own name as "''The Gaurdian''" in the 1970s (this was referenced in the Christmas special of ''Yes, Minister''). Although such errors are now less frequent than they used to be, the 'Corrections and clarifications' column can still often provide some amusement. There were even a number of errors in the first issue, perhaps the most notable being a notification that there would soon be some goods sold at ''atction'', instead of ''auction''. Until the foundation of the ''Independent'', the ''Guardian'' was the only serious national daily newspaper in England that was not clearly conservative in its political affiliation. The term "''Guardian'' reader" is therefore often used pejoratively by right-wingers and self-deprecatingly by those on the liberal-left. The reactionary stereotype of a ''Guardian'' reader is a person with leftist or liberal politics rooted in the 1960s, working in the public sector, regularly eating lentils and muesli, wearing Sandal (footwear) and believing in alternative medicine and natural medicine as evidenced by Labour Party (UK) Member of Parliament Kevin Hughes' largely rhetorical question in the British House of Commons on November 19, 2001:
:''Its international reprint weekly is titled ''Manchester Guardian Weekly'', which leads Americans to frequently refer to the British version as the ''Manchester Guardian'' though this has not been its name for many years.'' Hmmm... the ''[http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/ Guardian Weekly]'' section of the Guardian's website refers to it as just that, and the [http://www.bl.uk/catalogues/newspapers/record.ASP?lngMTitle=7109 British Library catalogue of newspapers] doesn't indicate that it switched back to being the ''MGW''. A [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22manchester+guardian+weekly%22 Google search] seems to find mainly American sources like the [http://library.nyu.edu/research/westeurope/unionlist/titleindex/manchester.htm NYU library catalog]. I can't help wondering whether the ''Weekly'' is sold as the ''MGW'' in America but not worldwide, or something like that. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr :This may be a case of its use for disambiguation purposes, much like The Times being catalogued as ''The London Times''. User:Mintguy User talk: Mintguy ...in which case the recently-added passage quoted above is essentially wrong. But it still seems to be commonplace for US libraries to refer to it as the ''Manchester Guardian Weekly'', even where they use ''The Times [London]'' or some other method of disambiguation for other papers. Some (see the NYU link above) also suggest it went back to being the ''MGW'' in 1978, as does the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=The_Guardian&action=history edit summary] by 12.144.5.2. Furthermore, The Library of Congress catalogues it as [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=1&ti=1,1&SC=Title&PID=7359&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England)&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England)&HC=1 GW from 1968 to 1984] ("Sometimes published as Manchester guardian weekly, Jan. 1, 1972-Dec. 30, 1972; Dec. 17, 1978-Jan. 7, 1979"), [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=3&ti=1,3&SEQ=20040404070150&Search_Arg=guardian+weekly&Search_Code=TALL&PID=7359&CNT=25&SID=1 MGW from 1985 to 2000] ("Scattered issues have title: Guardian weekly, 1999") and [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=2&ti=1,2&SEQ=20040404070706&SC=Title&PID=7359&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England+:+2000)&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England+:+2000)&HC=2&SID=7 GW again from 2000]. This is starting to make a it more sense, though I'd still like to know whether Guardian Media Group uses the ''MGW'' title oficially anywhere at the moment.--User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr :Grrr. Those LoC links were tied to a session and have timed out. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr Note, They have a forum which has many virtues. many erudite posters, but... is extremely poorly moderated. For instance, they have two 'policies' pages, one is extremely liberal (the one which is available from the ordinary users pages) and has four elements. The worst censure there is is "ocassional" removal of text, which "they really hate to do". They have another, hidden ( if one sees the first (s)he will not expect a second ) much longer and leads to banning at the drop of a hat. I've seen gangs of posters hunting down and mercilessly harrasing individuals with no response from mods after complaints. When the offended returns the offense (s)he is banned. No sense of context, no even hand, capricious acts of destruction, give the guardian a bad name. Thus an instutution of potentially great global signifigance is whittled down to a shadow of it's potential. If only the Guardian would take moderation seriously, we might expect great things from their 'talkboards'. Wblakesx ---- Let me summarize the main points of the ''Introduction'' section: #The Guardian is known for carrying an extraordinary amount of typographical errors. #Its readers are a bunch of weirdos. Not exactly NPOV, eh? Doesn't the paper have some positive qualities? regards, User:High on a tree 15:35, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC) ---- I've just removed the following sentence: "There is a section of the educated British Middle_Class that consider the Guardian to be a relatively good newspaper, marred largely by anti-middle-class rants by intellectual journalists who come from a middle-class background. " This seems to me a bit POV, a bit trivial, and not really encyclopedic; all it's really saying is that some readers like some contributers to the paper less than others, and that's probably true of most newspapers, at least most of those in which the words outnumber the pictures. User:Seglea 18:52, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) :I agree. I spotted this addition earlier and meant to revisit it once I got home. It is just the view of... some people. I think it's a Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms too far. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 19:04, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) "a weasle word too far", nice phrase, I quite like it! WblakesxUser:Wblakesx == Screen Burn controversy == I reverted this addition: :''Immediately preceding the 2004 election, the paper, in an editorial, called for the assassination of George W. Bush. While the paper tried to explain that it was a joke, it nonetheless hurt the newspaper's standing and credibility.'' Well, yes, the paper did explain that it was a joke (as well as apologising), which is reasonable given that it wasn't in an editorial but in a humorous column ("Screen Burn") in the TV listings supplement. It is already mentioned in the article on Charlie Brooker, who wrote the column. Did this really have any long-term effect on the paper's standing? It seems like a storm in a teacup to me, but I'm a long-term ''Guardian'' loyalist. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 21:45, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) ==Operation Clarke County== I've added this: ''The point of this venture was for the writers to give Clarke County voters a taste of international opinion. The Guardian's web pages describing how to get the name and address of a Clarke County resident stressed that this campaign in no way encouraged letter writers to endorse any candidate in the election.'' I know this because I actually got the name of a resident of Clarke County from the Guardian's web site. I didn't send a letter as I know that I'd resent an outsider 'explaining' my countries politics to me. Long live The Guardian, one of the few voices of reason in the British press. Alun Parsons ==Cutting down OCC section to more concise summary== I think it's time the OCC section was reduced to a short summary within the main text. The episode is a pretty tiny affair in the paper's history which appears to have gained undue weight simply because many Americans heard about it. User:Steinsky User talk:Steinsky 23:34, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) == purpose of name == It was decided to call the newspaper the Manchester Guardian. A prospectus was published which explained the aims and objectives of the proposed newspaper. It included the passage: "It will zealously enforce the principles of civil and religious Liberty, it will warmly advocate the cause of Reform; it will endeavour to assist in the diffusion of just principles of Political Economy." source: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRguardian.htm --User:Mick2 16:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Typos uncommon? Serious? == I would dispute the assertion that typos are now uncommon. And what the hell is a "serious broadsheet"? I know this is a term often used in the UK to differentiate papers from the tabloids (mainly because the tabloids have much much higher circulations) but it's not common elsewhere. User:Shermozle 12:45, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) :Well, I think it no longer has the reputation for an ''excessive'' or ''exceptional'' number of typos - obviously, anything with a turnaround as short as a daily newspaper will have ''some'', but I don't think the "Grauniad" is any worse than any others these days. But I could be wrong. :As for "serious broadsheet", by all means clarify it - I notice Broadsheet#Connotations is similarly biased towards this UK viewpoint. To a UK reader, "serious broadsheet" is almost tautological already; it's not to do with "higher circulations", it's to do with [perceived] difference in editorial style, focus and attitude. The Sun and Daily Sport are undeniably different from, say, The Times and The Guardian; "tabloid" vs "braodsheet" is (or was until recently) just a neat short-hand for referring to that difference. - User:IMSoP 19:38, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::Yeah, what IMSoP said. I'd add that I read the ''Guardian'' on a regular basis in paper format and I certainly don't feel that typos are common. The ones that do slip through are mostly homophones, with which they have a certain amount of fun in the "Corrections and Clarifications" column. The real point is that in the 1960s, when the paper was seriously under-resourced and editing and compositing functions were split in various ways between London and Manchester, typos ''really were'' common. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 19:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::And I'll add that broadsheet never meant anything to do with circulation, and while dictionaries no doubt still define it as the size of a sheet of paper it really has come to be a synonym of "serious editorial style", as the Times and Independent are still described as broadsheets despite no longer being that size. User:Steinsky User talk:Steinsky 19:52, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::I should be clearer what I meant by the "circulation" part... I'm talking about how papers, when either pitching for readers or advertisers, use ther term "serious" to differentiate themselves. So you get "The biggest circulation _serious_ daily", to differentiate themselves from, say, The Sun, which has a vastly higher circ than all the broadsheets. As for typos, well I guess I do this stuff for a living so it jumps out at me. User:Shermozle 09:25, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) :::Okay, so what do you think is in need of elucidation about "serious broadsheet"? Is it the nature of the seriousness? It seems to me that there are a number of aspects to that: :::*The news agenda is led by politics and world news rather than entertainment, celebrity and sports stories :::*There is relatively little use of humour in the news pages :::*The language is more complicated (reported in some places as a reading age of 13 vs. 7 for the Sun, though I don't know the origin of that claim) :::...or is it the overloading of the term "broadsheet" to mean both a large-format newspaper and a serious or upmarket paper? That is dealt with in broadsheet and I suspect it would be somewhat of a digression in this article. However, if it can be dealt with in a reasonably elegant phrase, it would be a good idea. After all, we don't want to confuse people just because they're not ''au fait'' with the UK newspaper market. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 21:28, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with The_Guardian:
The_Guardian
The_Guardian
The_Guardian_(1713)
The_Guardian_(1846)
The_Guardian_(movie)
The_Guardian_(television_series)
The_Guardian_(TV_series)
The_Guardian_Cycle
The_Guardian_Legend
The_Guardian_Legend
The_Guardian_newspaper
The_Guardian_of_Hell
The Guardian
''The Guardian'' is a British newspaper owned by the Guardian Media Group. It is a serious broadsheet newspaper published Monday–Saturday, with relatively left wing politics. Until 1959 it was called ''The Manchester Guardian'', reflecting its provincial origins: the paper is still sometimes referred to by this name, especially in North America. ''The Guardian'' has a newspaper circulation of around 345,000 copies (Jul-Dec 2004) [http://media.guardian.co.uk/presspublishing/tables/0,7680,1393113,00.html], which compares with other UK serious daily newspaper sales of 867,000 for the ''Daily Telegraph'', 616,000 for ''The Times'', and 226,000 for ''The Independent''. The paper is sometimes known as ''The Grauniad'' (coined by ''Private Eye''), as a result of frequent typographical errors for which it became infamous, although these are now uncommon. Their ''Guardian Unlimited'' web site won the Best Newspaper category in the 2005 Webby Awards, beating the ''New York Times'', the ''Washington Post'', the ''Wall Street Journal'' and ''Variety''. [http://www.webbyawards.com/webbys/current.php#webby_entry_newspaper] ==Ownership== ''The Guardian'' is part of the Guardian Media Group of newspapers, radio stations, and new media including ''The Observer'' Sunday newspaper, the ''Manchester Evening News'', and ''Guardian Unlimited'', one of the most popular online news resources on the Internet. All the aforementioned are owned by The Scott Trust, a charitable foundation which aims to ensure the newspaper's editorial independence in perpetuity, maintaining its financial health to ensure it does not become vulnerable to take over by for-profit media groups, and the serious compromise of editorial independence that this often brings. The ''Guardian'' and its parent groups are a participant in Project Syndicate [http://www.project-syndicate.org/], established by George Soros, and intervened in 1995 to save the ''Mail & Guardian'' in South Africa [http://www.mg.co.za/], but Guardian Media Group sold the majority of its shares in the ''Mail & Guardian'' in 2002. == History == The ''Manchester Guardian'' was founded in Manchester in 1821 by a group of non-conformist businessmen headed by John E. Taylor. The prospectus which announced the new publication proclaimed that "it will zealously enforce the principles of civil and religious Liberty … it will warmly advocate the cause of Reform; it will endeavour to assist in the diffusion of just principles of Political Economy; and to support, without reference to the party from which they emanate, all servicable measures." The first edition was published on May 5, 1821, at which time the ''Guardian'' was a weekly, published on Saturdays; the stamp duty on newspapers (4penny. per sheet) forced the price up so high that it was uneconomic to publish more frequently. When the stamp duty was cut in 1836 the ''Guardian'' added a Wednesday edition; with the abolition of the tax in 1855 it became a daily paper. Its most famous editor, Charles Prestwich Scott, made the ''Manchester Guardian'' into a nationally famous newspaper. He was editor for 57 years from 1872, and became its owner when he bought the paper from the estate of Taylor's son in 1907. Under Scott the paper's moderate editorial line became more radical, supporting Gladstone when the Liberals split in 1886, and opposing the Boer War against popular opinion. In June 1936, to avoid death duty, ownership of the paper was passed to the Scott Trust (named after the last owner, John Russell Scott, who was the first chairman of the Trust). The paper was then noted for its eccentric style, its moralising and its detached attitude to its finances. Traditionally affiliated with the centrist Liberal Party (UK), and with a northern circulation base, the paper earned a national reputation and the respect of the left during the Spanish Civil War, when along with the now defunct ''News Chronicle'' it was the only UK source of news that was not tainted by support for the insurgent nationalists led by General Francisco Franco. In 1959 the paper dropped "Manchester" from its title, becoming simply ''The Guardian'', and 1964 it moved to London, losing some of its regional agenda but continuing to be heavily subsidised by sales of the less intellectual but much more profitable ''Manchester Evening News''. The financial position remained extremely poor into the 1970s; at one time it was in merger talks with ''The Times''. The paper consolidated its left-wing stance during the 1970s and 1980s but was both shocked and revitalised by the launch of ''The Independent'' in 1986 which competed for similar readers and provoked the entire broadsheet industry into a fight for circulation. In 1988 ''The Guardian'' had a significant redesign; as well as improving the quality of its printers ink, it also changed its masthead. In 1992 it relaunched its features section as "G2", a tabloid-format supplement. This innovation was widely copied by the other "quality" broadsheets, and ultimately led to the rise of "compact" papers and ''The Guardian'''s planned move to the Berliner format. In 1993 the paper declined to participate in the broadsheet 'price war' started by Rupert Murdoch's ''The Times''. Also in 1993, ''The Guardian'' bought ''The Observer'' from Lonrho, thus gaining a serious Sunday newspaper partner with similar political views. In 1995, both the Granada Television program World In Action and ''The Guardian'' were sued for libel by the then cabinet minister Jonathan Aitken, for their allegation that the Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Fahd had paid for Aitken and his wife to stay at the Htel Ritz Paris in Paris, which would have amounted to accepting a bribe on Aitken's part. Aitken publically stated he would fight with "the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play" [http://www.guardian.co.uk/aitken/Story/0,2763,208516,00.html]. The court case proceeded, and in 1997 ''The Guardian'' produced evidence that Aitken's claim of his wife paying for the hotel stay was untrue. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/aitken/Story/0,2763,208503,00.html] In 1999, Aitken was jailed for perjury and perverting the course of justice. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/258070.stm] During the History of Afghanistan since 1992#U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and 2003 invasion of Iraq ''The Guardian'' attracted a significant proportion of anti-war readers as one of the mass-media media outlets most critical of UK and USA military initiatives. The newspaper also gained readers in the United States where there were few "anti-war" rivals. Its international weekly edition is now titled ''The Guardian Weekly'', though it retained the title ''Manchester Guardian Weekly'' for some years after the home edition had moved to London. It includes sections from a number of other internationally significant newspapers of a somewhat left-of-centre inclination, including ''Le Monde''. In 2004, ''The Guardian'' introduced an online digital version of its print edition, allowing readers to download pages from the last 14 issues as a portable document format files. In August 2004, for the U.S. presidential election, 2004, the daily "G2" supplement, edited by Ian Katz, launched an experimental letter-writing campaign in Clark_County%2C_Ohio, Ohio, a small county in a swing state. Katz bought a voter list from the county for $25 and asked people to write to those on the list undecided in the election. The point of this venture was for the writers to give Clark County voters a taste of international opinion, without endorsing any candidates. This caused something of a backlash, and on the 21st October, the paper retired the campaign. The Guardian also has a series of talkboards based on WebX technology that are noted for their mix of political disussion and whimsy. They are spoofed in the ''Guardian's'' own regular humorous ''Chatroom'' column in G2. == Moving to the Berliner == In 2004, ''The Guardian'' announced plans to change to a "Berliner (format)" or "midi (newspaper)" format similar to that used by ''Le Monde'' in France and some other European papers; at 470×315 mm, this is slightly larger than a traditional tabloid. Planned for the autumn of 2005 (some have suggested Monday 5 September 2005 as the starting date), this change is either a response to, or has the same cause as, the moves by ''The Times'' and ''The Independent'' to start publishing in tabloid (or "compact") format. The advantage that ''The Guardian'' sees in the Berliner format is that though it is little wider than a tabloid, and is thus equally easy to read on public transport, its greater height gives more flexibility in page design. An article in the ''Independent on Sunday'', dated January 30 2005, suggested that the move may be fraught with problems. As of January 2005, no printing press in the UK can produce newspapers in the Berliner format. One of the Guardian's presses is part owned by groups responsible for ''The Daily Telegraph'' and ''The Daily Express'' who would likely require compensation if ''The Guardian'' pulls out. It is contracted to use the plant until 2009. Another press is shared with the Guardian Media Group's north western local tabloid papers, which do not wish to switch to the Berliner format. ''The Guardian'' is rumoured to be spending over 65 million on the project as a whole. ''The Guardian'' has now confirmed rumours of an earlier launch date than their original plans for 2006, saying ''The Guardian'' will relaunch in the new format in the autumn with the Observer following in early 2006. The papers will be the first UK nationals able to print in full colour on every page. ==Supplements== On a weekday ''The Guardian'' comes with the G2 supplement containing feature articles, columns, television and radio listings and the quick crossword. Other regular supplements during the week include: *Monday: MediaGuardian, Office Hours, Sport *Tuesday: EducationGuardian *Wednesday: SocietyGuardian (covers the British public sector and related issues) *Thursday: Life (covers science), Online *Friday: Friday Review (covers music and film) *Saturday: The Guide (a weekly listings magazine), Weekend (the colour supplement), Review (covers literature), Jobs & Money, Travel, Sport Though the main news section is still in the large broadsheet format, the supplements are all in the half-sized tabloid format, with the exception of the glossy Weekend section which is a 290×245mm magazine and The Guide which is in a small 225×145mm format. ==''The Guardian'' in the popular imagination== The affectionate name the ''Grauniad'' for the paper came about because, in the past, it was noted for frequent text mangling, technical typesetting failures and typographical errors, including once misspelling its own name as "''The Gaurdian''" in the 1970s (this was referenced in the Christmas special of ''Yes, Minister''). Although such errors are now less frequent than they used to be, the 'Corrections and clarifications' column can still often provide some amusement. There were even a number of errors in the first issue, perhaps the most notable being a notification that there would soon be some goods sold at ''atction'', instead of ''auction''. Until the foundation of the ''Independent'', the ''Guardian'' was the only serious national daily newspaper in England that was not clearly conservative in its political affiliation. The term "''Guardian'' reader" is therefore often used pejoratively by right-wingers and self-deprecatingly by those on the liberal-left. The reactionary stereotype of a ''Guardian'' reader is a person with leftist or liberal politics rooted in the 1960s, working in the public sector, regularly eating lentils and muesli, wearing Sandal (footwear) and believing in alternative medicine and natural medicine as evidenced by Labour Party (UK) Member of Parliament Kevin Hughes' largely rhetorical question in the British House of Commons on November 19, 2001:
"Does my right hon. Friend find it bizarre — as I do — that the yoghurt- and muesli-eating, ''Guardian''-reading fraternity are only too happy to protect the human rights of people engaged in terrorism acts, but never once do they talk about the human rights of those who are affected by them?" [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo011119/debtext/11119-08.htm#11119-08_spnew3]Like most stereotypes, this one is both inaccurate and outdated. For instance, the ''Guardian'''s science coverage is now extensive; and although its ''Weekend'' supplement features a column by Emma Mitchell, a natural health therapist, its general slant is a contempt for alternative medicine, as evidenced by the sceptical ''Bad Science'' column by Ben Goldacre. The stereotype, however, is a persistent feature of English political discourse. Even doctors perpetuate it by using the acronym ''GROLIES'' (Guardian Reader Of Low Intelligence in Ethnic Skirt) on patient notes. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3159813.stm] ''The Guardian'' has a tradition of spoof articles on April Fool's Day, sometimes contributed by regular advertisers such as BMW. The most elaborate of these was a travel supplement on San Serriffe. ==Literary patronage== ''The Guardian'' is the sponsor of two major literary awards: The Guardian First Book Award, established in 1999 as a successor to the Guardian Fiction Award which had run since 1965, and the Guardian Children's Fiction Prize, founded in 1967. In recent years it has also sponsored the Hay Festival in Hay-on-Wye. ==Editors== *John Edward Taylor (1821–1844) *Jeremiah Garnett (1844–1861) (jointly with Russell Scott Taylor in 1847–1848) *John Edward Taylor (1861–1872) *Charles Prestwich Scott (1872–1929) *Edward Taylor Scott (1929–1932) *William Percival Crozier (1932–1944) *Alfred Powell Wadsworth (1944–1956) *Alastair Hetherington (1956–1975) *Peter Preston (1975–1995) *Alan Rusbridger (1995—) ==Current columnists== *Ian Black *Alexander Chancellor *Larry Elliott *Jonathan Freedland *Timothy Garton Ash *Ben Goldacre *Roy Hattersley *Isabel Hilton *Simon Hoggart *Will Hutton *Simon Jenkins as of summer 2005 *Victor Keegan *Martin Kettle *Mark Lawson *Ian Mayes *David McKie *George Monbiot *John O'Farrell *Peter Preston *John Sutherland *Simon Tisdall *Polly Toynbee *Xinran Xue *Gary Younge ==Notable regular contributors (past and present)== *David Aaronovitch *Araucaria (compiler) *John Arlott *David Austin *Steve Bell *Heston Blumenthal *Julian Borger *Julie Burchill *Duncan Campbell *Neville Cardus *Alastair Cooke *G. D. H. Cole *Harold Evans *Paul Foot *Michael Frayn *Suzanne Goldenberg *Ben Hammersley *Jeremy Hardy *Clifford Harper *Max Hastings *David Hencke *L. T. Hobhouse *J. A. Hobson *Stanley Johnson *Rod Liddle *David Low *George Monbiot *C. E. Montague *Malcolm Muggeridge *James Naughtie *Richard Norton-Taylor *Anne Perkins *Melanie Phillips *John Pilger *Arthur Ransome *Brian Redhead *Jon Ronson *Martin Rowson *Posy Simmonds *Mark Steel *Jonathan Steele *Mary Stott *Garry Trudeau *Jill Tweedie *Brian Whitaker *Martin Woollacott *Ted Wragg *Hugo Young *Ed Vulliamy ==The Newsroom archive== ''The Guardian'' and its sister newspaper ''The Observer'' operate a visitor centre in London called The Newsroom. It contains their archives, including bound copies of old editions, a photographic library and other items such as diaries, letters and notebooks. This material may be consulted by members of the public. The Newsroom also mounts temporary exhibitions and runs an educational programme for schools. There is also an extensive ''Manchester Guardian'' archive at the University of Manchester's John Rylands Library and there is a collaboration programme between the two archives. ==See also== * Notes & Queries ==External links== * [http://www.guardian.co.uk/ Guardian Unlimited] * [http://www.guardian.co.uk/rssfeed/0,,1,00.xml Guardian Front Page RSS feed] (in XML; use a news aggregator) * [http://digital.guardian.co.uk/ Digital Guardian] * [http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRguardian.htm Founding of the Manchester Guardian] * [http://www.guardian.co.uk/newsroom Information about The Newsroom Archive and Visitor Centre] * [http://rylibweb.man.ac.uk/data2/spcoll/guardian/ Information about The Guardian Archive at John Rylands Library in Manchester] * [http://media.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4777964-105414,00.html Media Guardian: How the broadsheets brightened up] * [http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1335892,00.html Featured G2 article on Wikipedia, Tuesday 26th October 2004] * [http://talk.guardian.co.uk The Guardian Unlimited Talk Board] * [http://news.independent.co.uk/media/story.jsp?story=605882 Independent on Sunday] article on problems with the Berliner format change (subscription service) British newspapers
The Guardian
:''Its international reprint weekly is titled ''Manchester Guardian Weekly'', which leads Americans to frequently refer to the British version as the ''Manchester Guardian'' though this has not been its name for many years.'' Hmmm... the ''[http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/ Guardian Weekly]'' section of the Guardian's website refers to it as just that, and the [http://www.bl.uk/catalogues/newspapers/record.ASP?lngMTitle=7109 British Library catalogue of newspapers] doesn't indicate that it switched back to being the ''MGW''. A [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22manchester+guardian+weekly%22 Google search] seems to find mainly American sources like the [http://library.nyu.edu/research/westeurope/unionlist/titleindex/manchester.htm NYU library catalog]. I can't help wondering whether the ''Weekly'' is sold as the ''MGW'' in America but not worldwide, or something like that. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr :This may be a case of its use for disambiguation purposes, much like The Times being catalogued as ''The London Times''. User:Mintguy User talk: Mintguy ...in which case the recently-added passage quoted above is essentially wrong. But it still seems to be commonplace for US libraries to refer to it as the ''Manchester Guardian Weekly'', even where they use ''The Times [London]'' or some other method of disambiguation for other papers. Some (see the NYU link above) also suggest it went back to being the ''MGW'' in 1978, as does the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=The_Guardian&action=history edit summary] by 12.144.5.2. Furthermore, The Library of Congress catalogues it as [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=1&ti=1,1&SC=Title&PID=7359&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England)&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England)&HC=1 GW from 1968 to 1984] ("Sometimes published as Manchester guardian weekly, Jan. 1, 1972-Dec. 30, 1972; Dec. 17, 1978-Jan. 7, 1979"), [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=3&ti=1,3&SEQ=20040404070150&Search_Arg=guardian+weekly&Search_Code=TALL&PID=7359&CNT=25&SID=1 MGW from 1985 to 2000] ("Scattered issues have title: Guardian weekly, 1999") and [http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=2&ti=1,2&SEQ=20040404070706&SC=Title&PID=7359&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England+:+2000)&SA=Guardian+weekly+(Manchester,+England+:+2000)&HC=2&SID=7 GW again from 2000]. This is starting to make a it more sense, though I'd still like to know whether Guardian Media Group uses the ''MGW'' title oficially anywhere at the moment.--User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr :Grrr. Those LoC links were tied to a session and have timed out. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr Note, They have a forum which has many virtues. many erudite posters, but... is extremely poorly moderated. For instance, they have two 'policies' pages, one is extremely liberal (the one which is available from the ordinary users pages) and has four elements. The worst censure there is is "ocassional" removal of text, which "they really hate to do". They have another, hidden ( if one sees the first (s)he will not expect a second ) much longer and leads to banning at the drop of a hat. I've seen gangs of posters hunting down and mercilessly harrasing individuals with no response from mods after complaints. When the offended returns the offense (s)he is banned. No sense of context, no even hand, capricious acts of destruction, give the guardian a bad name. Thus an instutution of potentially great global signifigance is whittled down to a shadow of it's potential. If only the Guardian would take moderation seriously, we might expect great things from their 'talkboards'. Wblakesx ---- Let me summarize the main points of the ''Introduction'' section: #The Guardian is known for carrying an extraordinary amount of typographical errors. #Its readers are a bunch of weirdos. Not exactly NPOV, eh? Doesn't the paper have some positive qualities? regards, User:High on a tree 15:35, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC) ---- I've just removed the following sentence: "There is a section of the educated British Middle_Class that consider the Guardian to be a relatively good newspaper, marred largely by anti-middle-class rants by intellectual journalists who come from a middle-class background. " This seems to me a bit POV, a bit trivial, and not really encyclopedic; all it's really saying is that some readers like some contributers to the paper less than others, and that's probably true of most newspapers, at least most of those in which the words outnumber the pictures. User:Seglea 18:52, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) :I agree. I spotted this addition earlier and meant to revisit it once I got home. It is just the view of... some people. I think it's a Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms too far. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 19:04, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) "a weasle word too far", nice phrase, I quite like it! WblakesxUser:Wblakesx == Screen Burn controversy == I reverted this addition: :''Immediately preceding the 2004 election, the paper, in an editorial, called for the assassination of George W. Bush. While the paper tried to explain that it was a joke, it nonetheless hurt the newspaper's standing and credibility.'' Well, yes, the paper did explain that it was a joke (as well as apologising), which is reasonable given that it wasn't in an editorial but in a humorous column ("Screen Burn") in the TV listings supplement. It is already mentioned in the article on Charlie Brooker, who wrote the column. Did this really have any long-term effect on the paper's standing? It seems like a storm in a teacup to me, but I'm a long-term ''Guardian'' loyalist. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 21:45, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) ==Operation Clarke County== I've added this: ''The point of this venture was for the writers to give Clarke County voters a taste of international opinion. The Guardian's web pages describing how to get the name and address of a Clarke County resident stressed that this campaign in no way encouraged letter writers to endorse any candidate in the election.'' I know this because I actually got the name of a resident of Clarke County from the Guardian's web site. I didn't send a letter as I know that I'd resent an outsider 'explaining' my countries politics to me. Long live The Guardian, one of the few voices of reason in the British press. Alun Parsons ==Cutting down OCC section to more concise summary== I think it's time the OCC section was reduced to a short summary within the main text. The episode is a pretty tiny affair in the paper's history which appears to have gained undue weight simply because many Americans heard about it. User:Steinsky User talk:Steinsky 23:34, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) == purpose of name == It was decided to call the newspaper the Manchester Guardian. A prospectus was published which explained the aims and objectives of the proposed newspaper. It included the passage: "It will zealously enforce the principles of civil and religious Liberty, it will warmly advocate the cause of Reform; it will endeavour to assist in the diffusion of just principles of Political Economy." source: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRguardian.htm --User:Mick2 16:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Typos uncommon? Serious? == I would dispute the assertion that typos are now uncommon. And what the hell is a "serious broadsheet"? I know this is a term often used in the UK to differentiate papers from the tabloids (mainly because the tabloids have much much higher circulations) but it's not common elsewhere. User:Shermozle 12:45, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) :Well, I think it no longer has the reputation for an ''excessive'' or ''exceptional'' number of typos - obviously, anything with a turnaround as short as a daily newspaper will have ''some'', but I don't think the "Grauniad" is any worse than any others these days. But I could be wrong. :As for "serious broadsheet", by all means clarify it - I notice Broadsheet#Connotations is similarly biased towards this UK viewpoint. To a UK reader, "serious broadsheet" is almost tautological already; it's not to do with "higher circulations", it's to do with [perceived] difference in editorial style, focus and attitude. The Sun and Daily Sport are undeniably different from, say, The Times and The Guardian; "tabloid" vs "braodsheet" is (or was until recently) just a neat short-hand for referring to that difference. - User:IMSoP 19:38, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::Yeah, what IMSoP said. I'd add that I read the ''Guardian'' on a regular basis in paper format and I certainly don't feel that typos are common. The ones that do slip through are mostly homophones, with which they have a certain amount of fun in the "Corrections and Clarifications" column. The real point is that in the 1960s, when the paper was seriously under-resourced and editing and compositing functions were split in various ways between London and Manchester, typos ''really were'' common. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 19:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::And I'll add that broadsheet never meant anything to do with circulation, and while dictionaries no doubt still define it as the size of a sheet of paper it really has come to be a synonym of "serious editorial style", as the Times and Independent are still described as broadsheets despite no longer being that size. User:Steinsky User talk:Steinsky 19:52, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::I should be clearer what I meant by the "circulation" part... I'm talking about how papers, when either pitching for readers or advertisers, use ther term "serious" to differentiate themselves. So you get "The biggest circulation _serious_ daily", to differentiate themselves from, say, The Sun, which has a vastly higher circ than all the broadsheets. As for typos, well I guess I do this stuff for a living so it jumps out at me. User:Shermozle 09:25, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) :::Okay, so what do you think is in need of elucidation about "serious broadsheet"? Is it the nature of the seriousness? It seems to me that there are a number of aspects to that: :::*The news agenda is led by politics and world news rather than entertainment, celebrity and sports stories :::*There is relatively little use of humour in the news pages :::*The language is more complicated (reported in some places as a reading age of 13 vs. 7 for the Sun, though I don't know the origin of that claim) :::...or is it the overloading of the term "broadsheet" to mean both a large-format newspaper and a serious or upmarket paper? That is dealt with in broadsheet and I suspect it would be somewhat of a digression in this article. However, if it can be dealt with in a reasonably elegant phrase, it would be a good idea. After all, we don't want to confuse people just because they're not ''au fait'' with the UK newspaper market. --User:RbrwrUser talk:Rbrwr 21:28, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
T
TA | TB | TC | TD | TE | TF | TG | TH | TI | TJ | TK | TL | TŁ | TM | TN | TO | TP | TR | TS | TU | TW | TX | TY | TZ |Words begining with The_Guardian:
The_Guardian
The_Guardian
The_Guardian_(1713)
The_Guardian_(1846)
The_Guardian_(movie)
The_Guardian_(television_series)
The_Guardian_(TV_series)
The_Guardian_Cycle
The_Guardian_Legend
The_Guardian_Legend
The_Guardian_newspaper
The_Guardian_of_Hell
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
