[Closed] "i" Newspaper

Also a Guardian reader. I read the i regulalrly and read the Guardian on Saturday when I have time.
I think its very good.

I would go an get a copy but Ive not seen one around

I suspect some shops hide them a bit as they are only 20p!

I've bought it a couple of times, it's just the Independent lite - I liked it tho' and much more ergonomic and user friendly than normal papers

[img] [/img]

Ernie & I will pay for this to be delivered to your door, comrade.

TBH, I now only buy the [i]Grauniad[/i] on saturdays (and how I wish they would bring back ye olde review format...), unless I need something to read on the train.

I bought the " i " yesterday as it happens, but that was partly because I needed newspaper for the bottom of me birdcages. And the ****ers put staples in it btw......which causes the paper to tear as you remove the pages - gits.

Good value though.

Ive got a sneaky suspicion The Morning Star might let their editorial lilt taint their news coverage a little....

Ernie & I will pay for this .......

I don't approve of its unauthorised use by members of the bourgeoisie - sorry.

unauthorised use

Just how absorbent is it?

It's the other way round mate - I absorb everything in it ...... religiously.

Yep the i is my paper of choice at the moment, always been a guardian or independant reader but never blessed with enough free time to read the whole thing.
Also with its size, the i makes a much more suitable read on the can.
still cant beat the observer on a sunday though

It's basically the Indy for those with little time or a very short attention span - a slightly less right wing version of the Metro, if you prefer.

I read the Guardian for years, and still do occasionally, but it's so lightweight, insufferably smug and patronising these days, I don't often bother.
They canned the excellent technology supplement and I miss the Lynn Barber interviews.
The sports coverage is very poor these days and only seems to bother with the Premier League, Cricket and the Premiership Rugby - not much else gets a look in.

I do like the Indy, but yes, it's like being trapped in a lift with a sociology lecturer. Probably the best out of the lot, but it's very dry.

Don't mind the Telegraph. I'm not one of nature's natural right wingers but it's nice to know what the enemy are thinking. 🙂
It's often funny and insightful and the sports coverage is excellent.

Can't stand The Times, never really got on with the style, too London centric and I find it politically dubious.

insufferably smug and patronising these days

I finally came to that conclusion listening to Rusbridger on the Media Show on R4 the other day talking about Assange/Leaks etc.

I think we have very similar views on papers RS.

I suspect that the broadsheets headlong charge into tabloid is not going to end well for those of us who aren't interested in football, horse racing or celebrities.

i has got me reading a daily paper again.
Used to read the Guardian but it is pretty dire these days, and the Observer is just sad now, no depth or interest and huge adverts across pages with the articles clinging to the sides. It needs to be put out of it's misery.
Can't beat 5 daily papers for £1 a week. Good sport coverage and a good level crossword (for me anyway...I suspect it may be easy for some!!

The issue of newspapers not being quite what they were is easily solved.

Simply go [url= http://www.historic-newspapers.co.uk/?source=webgains&siteid=79607 ]here[/url], order a copy dated from the time when the news content/editorial style most suited you and - [i]voilà![/i] - read it (ostentatiously) on the train.

Most people buy paper to be told what they want to hear, hence it is difficult run a paper that does good impartial articles. `i' looks interesting though. It would be nice it there was a stripped down version of the economist or similar, brief overviews of their articles.

The internet is for news.

Newspapers are for lazy Sundays or train journeys.

Heard that as well Stoner, made we want to kick him very hard.
It's just his manner, TBH.
Polly Toynbee makes me want to commit mass murder these days, too.

Everything seems to be written in a sneering, superior, 'ironic' style that really grates after a while.
Even Charlie Brooker has disappeared in a cloud of his own self importance.

Mind you, the Indy has Street-Porter, which evens things up considerably. I've never heard a human being spout such utter nonsense as that woman does, week after week.
Okay. maybe Andrew Neil.

See also Bryony Gordon in the Telegraph - which one of the Barclay brothers did she sleep with to get that job?
Allison Pearson is utterly awful as well - Glenda Slag with posher vowels.

Most people buy paper to be told what they want to hear

Not entirely. I cant stand Toynbee or Monbiot but take the guardian originally for the news reporting. The editorials and letters pages arent going to align with my politics though but I could live with that as long as the news was ostensibly neutral.

There was a left-wing commentator who, to his friend's horror, once said that he regularly took the Daily Mail. He said it was necessary though to get a full breadth of the news. Whilst he didn't agree with the way something was reported in the DM, it would cover stories that the Guardian would simply chose NOT to report on for their own political reasons - such as immigration issues.

I find the economist to have the perfect pitch intellectually, politically, and economically for me but as you say can be a bit heavy-weight by the time you've got half way through.

What about [url= http://www.theweek.co.uk/ ]The Week?[/url]

wasnt she originally bryony maddox? Awful writer.

And Tanya gold! WTF ! did she fellate rusbridger or something?
Zoe Williams and her "Im a mum and know more about child-rearing than you". The original Polly Filler perhaps! 🙂

Rebecca Orr is the latest windbag to produce junk in the G2.

the problem with "the week" is that its a weekly retrospective. By the time I get round to reading it I will have already assimilated the news from multiple sources through the week anyway.

In that case do you even need a newspaper if you able to gather news via osmosis?

I have started taking the i. I like it's bite size reports as I don't have time for a broadsheet.

tea leaves. not osmosis.

how's the "i" for international news? Not just the big ticket stuff, but the significant local foreign stories?

I read the Graun as well, but only ever online. I can't bring myself to line the pockets of the tax-dodging hypocrites.

(Blue touch paper lit, Flash retires to a safe distance)

your best bet is to become a paper boy

that way you get to read all the papers for free

of course back when i was a paper boy all i read tittylating tabloid stories and the headlines

was always interesting to compare different papers take on the same story even relatively staright forward things like transfer fees would never be the same figure in 2 papers

i found the i a bit too light tbh i just read the guardian and ignore anything by monbiot

but only on the internets anyway

The [url= http://www.therealnews.com/t2/ ]Real News[/url] network is worth a look; [url= http://www.newsmap.jp/#/b,m,n,t,w/uk/view/ ]newsmap.jp[/url] is good for an overview of global online news coverage.

In our village shop we are the [u]only[/u] Guardian subscribers 😯

I think our card is marked for it...

All the news anybody could ever, [i]ever[/i] need...

cheers 3fish. newsmap looks excellent.

When I read the news online, there's no problem. But I like a bit of newsprint in my paws over morning cofee...

The last time I tried reading the Independent it was like being locked in a room with TJ.

Thank you. I've just spat coffee all over my keyboard.

😆

wasnt she originally bryony maddox? Awful writer.

Not sure, I know she was a '3am' girl, so she knows where the bodies are buried.
Last weeks column about how she used to hate cats, but she might change her mind now that her flatmate has acquired one was a classic of it's kind - vacuous, meaningless toss.
And I like cats.

Hadley Freeman in the Guardian is very good these days and I always find Johan Hari worth reading.

I know Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is a real person (I've seen her on the telly), but her column seems to be a very clever Craig Brown satire these days.

Speaking of papers, I read this yesterday (apologies if the link was posted on here): [url= http://nosleeptilbrooklands.blogspot.com/2011/01/true-story-of-daily-mail-lies-guest.html ]http://nosleeptilbrooklands.blogspot.com/2011/01/true-story-of-daily-mail-lies-guest.html[/url]

aaah.
Confused with Bronwen Maddox. Sorry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronwen_Maddoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronwen_Maddox

She's still daft.

I want HF to have my babies.

jazz - someone did put that up yesterday. Was interesting, if not wholly unexpected 🙂

still cant beat the observer on a sunday though

As a weekend subscriber I'm disgruntled with the 'new'(ish) Observer format - no proper travel section (a page in the magazine doesn't count as a 'section') and the magazine seems to have become 'vogue lite' its all fashion and make-up and trivial nonsense. It is so obviously a cost-cutting exercise.

The Saturday Guardian is much better and how a proper paper should be.

Not had a proper look at the i yet, back in my student days when I occasionally bought the independent all they seemed to do was bang on about the environment, is that still the case?

It's a really good alternative to the Metro, which I believe has been put on this earth to smack people around the head until they are brain dead, or worst still turn into Daily Mail readers.

I'm not keen on the indy either. i is a bit breezier in style, though still with lots of proper news content.

whatever you do dont read the metro (yeah i know)

this was todays front page story
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/854617-bike-mp-saddles-us-with-40p-bill

this was page3
http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/854616-owl-tries-to-swallow-frog-in-one-go

all that dull reshaping of the political landscape across the arab world stuff got a look in about page 7 i think

I get the Guardian but I have to disagree with the comment about the technology area. It was so incredibly biased depending on which person wrote it (Jack "I Love Microsoft" Schofield, that other chap who used his column just to bash Google....)

I'm also (while fairly left wing) beginning to hate a certain wishy-washiness in the paper and it's simpering religious apologetics.

But I agree with Clair Rayner when she talked about papers, the Torygraph to see what the enemy is thinking, the Mirror to see what the 'left-wing' are thinking (tho it's crap now) and the Mail to see what the idiots are thinking!

(Jack "I Love Microsoft" Schofield, that other chap who used his column just to bash Google....)

I used to swear the Ask Jack column was made up.