[waboremo]

Is this because you don't read The Guardian and would opt to blindly believe the first thing said about it?

[throwaway202303]

I read articles quite regularly. They are almost always heavily partisan, spuriously sourced and have been on the wrong side of major stories for years

[throwaway2037]

I'm confused. (1) You read it regularly. (2) Then you say: "heavily partisan, spuriously sourced and have been on the wrong side of major stories for years".

It seems strange to read a newspaper regularly that is so bad.

What do you recommend instead?

[gumballindie]

I regularly read both sides of a story to avoid getting polarised. And by doing and avg of each side’s views i might find the truth. But the guardian has a heavy fetish for poverty porn and stereotyping making it difficult to digest. A bit like the dailymail but with less useful content and more racial tension.

[I_complete_me]

For a second there I thought it was throwaway responding to his own comment. I loved him for one second!

[Capricorn2481]

Let's hear that awesome, alternative, unbiased news source

[netbioserror]

There's no need, criticism of one thing does not require endorsement of an alternative. The Guardian deserves every rotten fruit and compressed fecal mass thrown at it.