Whichever way you cut it, there is no reasonable excuse for handing a Chinese steelmaker a multimillion-pound order when British Steel has said it is capable of providing the materials.
Business editor of Torygraph fails to ask “What’s the price?”
Ho Hum.
It’s a forever political mystery that low-paid/working-class voters will opt for the very wealthy with contrary financial interests.
Like, you know, Toynbees?
The latest sorry saga featuring a multimillionaire celebrity and a hapless nepo baby centres on Rolling Stones guitarist, Ronnie Wood, and his son, Jesse. It was revealed this week, as Jesse appeared in court on speeding charges, that he is unemployed and living off savings of barely £1,000 a month.
Savings of £1k a month, eh?
Income from savings of £1k a month, OK, maybe. So, what, £120k to £240k in assets? About?
But savings of £1k a month – is there some reason the paper refuses to commission me any more?
Billionaire and career Bond-villain cosplayer Elon Musk has been forced by public backlash into a humiliating backdown over use of his AI chatbot, Grok. Watching the world’s richest man eat a shit sandwich on a global stage represents a rare win for sovereign democracy.
Yes, it goes on like that for paragrpah after paragraph.
Over Grok’s piccies.
Still, if the mad in Oz (this is van Badham) think this is a grand victory then let ’em. Leaves the rest of us to get on with life as normal, right?
A great deal of the mainstream media seems reluctant to question Donald Trump’s stunning move. CBS News, under new editorial leadership, is leading that pack. Its Tuesday-night broadcast was practically Fox Lite, including a too-cute montage of AI-created images of the US secretary of state and former Florida senator, Marco Rubio, and these words from anchor Tony Dokoupil: “It is a sign of how Florida, once an American punchline, has become a leader on the world stage … Marco Rubio, we salute you.” The segment was meant to be lighthearted, but it struck many as tone-deaf, or just plain irresponsible, under the circumstances.
To their credit, influential global outlets like the Associated Press, Reuters, the Guardian, the Washington Post and the New York Times are providing serious news coverage. I was impressed, for example, by a Post piece that explored the growing despair on the streets, headlined “Fear grips Caracas as a new wave of repression is unleashed in Venezuela”. Detailing the crackdown that included the detention of journalists, the arrests of civilians and the spread of armed gangs, it stood in sharp contrast with a Post editorial that immediately cheered “one of the boldest moves a president has made in years” under the glowing headline: “Justice in Venezuela.”
Margaret Sullivan, one of thoe very definitely part of the American journalistic establishment.
Serious news coverage is defined as that ctritical of Trump. Obviously.
Seen this way, Trump’s indulgence of Russian ambitions in Ukraine is hardly mysterious. Back in 2019, Russia reportedly proposed offering increased US influence in Venezuela in exchange for the US retreating from Ukraine. Who knows if such a deal has been made. What is certainly true is that a new world order is being born. It is one where increasingly authoritarian powers use brute force to subjugate their neighbours and steal their resources. What once might have sounded like dystopian fantasy is being assembled in plain sight. The question is whether we have the means, willingness and ability to fight back.
Pity. Owen Jones is often amusing in his hysteria but this is just standard regurgitation of the usual talking points from the nuttersd.
At Zohran Mamdani’s block party, I observed a simple truth: people want more politics, not less
Samuel Earle
The sort of people who go to a Mayoral block party want more politics. But this is hardly a surprise.
As he was sworn in outside city hall in front of a crowd of a few thousand of us, a nearby street in Manhattan was closed to traffic so that tens of thousands more could gather to watch the historic moment live on enormous screens.
Tens of thousands, eh? In a population of 8.5 million?
Anyone else heard of selection bias?
Private markets, very bad, really, terrible. All Yankee, see.
Private markets very good, see. Add work “tech” and ……
That actually from the same Willy Hutton article. He can’t even keep the story straight for a whole 1,200 words.
There’s a piece out there, usng Kant’s philosophy of the Enlightenment to discuss how we’re all about to be turned into feudal serfs by AI. Got that far into it, the exposition of the article’s main idea, and realised that life’s too short to read that sort of intellectual wank.
Ho Hum.
Bari Weiss yanking a 60 Minutes story is censorship by oligarchy
Margaret Sullivan
Weiss ought to cut her losses, green-light the piece, and try to start acting like an editor – not like a cog in the machine of authoritarian politics and oligarchy
Editor edits – decides upon running a story or not – and this is bad and she should stop and start acting like an editor?
As editor in chief, of course, Weiss has the power to make the decision she did. That comes with the job.
But it doesn’t make her decision right. It wasn’t.
Oooooh. So you mean you disagree with her decision? Upon political grounds?
Oh, well then…..sod off.
One of the great joys of Christmas for me has been being able to share my love of The Nutcracker with my son. Last year, I took him to see a child-friendly version by the Let’s All Dance ballet company. The look of wonderment and recognition on his face when the music started up is a memory that I’ll treasure for ever.
I’ll confess that the idea of taking a then two-year-old to a ballet had struck me as faintly ridiculous, one of those painfully middle-class-coded things I find myself doing as a parent (see also Mini Mozart). That kind of thinking, though, is in itself elitist, because who says ballet, or classical music, should be only for rarefied audiences?
Still, at least Rhiannon knows her audience. Wholly, entirely, haute bourgeois who have to be assured that they’re not – you know, Guardian readers.
The Duchess of Sussex has accused the Daily Mail of breaching “clear ethical boundaries” by reporting from the bedside of her estranged father, following his claims he had not received his daughter’s messages.
Thomas Markle appealed to Meghan to see him in a Mail on Sunday interview at the weekend, after he underwent serious surgery in the Philippines.
However, a spokesperson for Meghan said she had been attempting to reach her father, and criticised the paper’s behaviour.
“Given that a Daily Mail reporter has remained at her father’s bedside throughout, broadcasting each interaction and breaching clear ethical boundaries, it has been exceedingly difficult for the duchess to contact her father privately, despite her efforts over the past several days,” the spokesperson said.
We know the Amerians get all uptight about journalistic ethics – when they’re not shagging interviewees – but it’s not really ever been a thing in this country….
In 1936, John Scott, son of the late Guardian owner and legendary editor CP Scott, did something unheard of for a media heir: he gave up his stake for the greater good.
After inheriting the newspaper, Scott renounced all financial benefit – bar his salary – in the Guardian (worth £1m at the time and around £62m today) and passed ownership over to the newly formed Scott Trust. The Trust would evolve to have one key mission: to secure the financial and editorial independence of the Guardian in perpetuity.
That means the Guardian can’t be bought.
They’ve been dodging inheritance tax for 89 years now.
A new media landscape has hoved into view. Most of the debacle has been litigated on Substacks, independent podcasts and personal websites. Lizza claimed his belated revelations on his own newsletter about Nuzzi’s infractions, which, he said, included her helping RFK Jr in his run for president by sharing intel from sources, were in the public interest – the public in this instance being those signed up to Lizza’s Substack, who first gained free tidbits before being ushered to a paywall. Nuzzi herself, barring one glossy profile in the New York Times, has given her exclusive updates to other newsletter writers and podcasters. The froth of it all swirled on social media. Step back, and ask: “But is it journalism?” The answer is: definitely not. But I’m still not sure what it is.
But journalism is important! shrieks the Guardian columnist. Journalists are important! Who sucks who in journalism is important!
Because if that’s true then the passing synapse-fries of a Guardian columnist are important, see?
If, on the other hand, we were to take a rational view. Journalism is that effort to fill in the white gaps between the advertisements. And journalists have always been regarded as the scum they are – a journo shagging someone? Blimey, eh?
But, you know, whatever comforting lies help youi do your job, Honey.
Amen’s jumper by the all-American preppy label J Crew has sent thousands of Maga Americans into meltdown. From a fashion point of view, it couldn’t be more innocuous. It’s got a crew neck. It’s made from wool. It has a Fair Isle pattern at the upper yoke. There’s nothing asymmetric about it, no fringing or tassels, no slogan blasted across the front; no “Make America Kind Again”. So what’s the big deal? Reader, the jumper is pink.
If the Greens are serious about redistributing unearned wealth, they should widen their focus from Mr and Mrs Megabucks to well-to-do families across the country who, just by dint of being sufficiently old and/or lucky are sitting in houses that have rocketed in value since the late 90s. But chance would be a fine thing: next May, Polanski and his troops will be marching on inner-London councils such as Hackney, where an ordinary terrace house now fetches just shy of a million pounds, over three times the average across England. Far easier to claim the problem is all a few billionaires.
OK, houses are too expensive. Let’s fix that.
or cheering on the bulldozing of our planning system
That would wpork, yes. Except, of course, Aditya rejects that solution to the very problem he outlines. And it’s also the only answer to the problem he outlines – build 1-0 million more houses is what is needed to bring house prices down.
Fun how he always misses, no?
It’s one outrage in days full of outrageous material.
“Quiet, piggy,” Donald Trump told a female reporter in a press gaggle, pointing his finger at her angrily.
It wasn’t the first time – not even the hundredth time – the US president has attacked the media. And it’s hard for any storyline to break through the administration’s “flood the zone” strategy, much less one like this. Nothing seems to stick. But the “quiet, piggy” clip has taken off, several days after the admonishment occurred on Air Force One last Friday, and without much help from the media itself.
….The anger he displayed in the clip could be a sign of someone on the back foot, overreacting to a question Bloomberg correspondent Catherine Lucey was asking
Anyone asked whether Ms. Lucey’s nickname is, in fact, “Piggy?”
The dossier alleges BBC Panorama doctored a speech by Trump, making him appear to support the January 6 rioters, that its Arabic coverage privileged pro-Hamas views, and that a group of LGBTQ employees had excessive influence on coverage of sex and gender.
Seem well founded complaints. So what does out Guardian journalist say in response?
As someone who has spent years dealing with the issue of impartiality told me, this is an entirely wrongheaded and now discredited view of impartiality, the sort of view that led to airtime being given to climate denial.
Oh, right, well there we are then.
The long-term implications of this are dire. A report in the Lancet tells us that US aid alone prevented more than 4 million deaths – one third of them children – in every year of the first two decades of this century. That support has gone.
If folk had turned around and said thank you – rather than what everyone always did do, which is snarl at the global hegemon for being, well, successful – then it might not have been so easy for someone to turn off that tap.
But the US always, always, was the baddie in social discourse. Even while saving those 4 million a year from death.
