Another Brexit Bonus

[delmbox]

Speaking of the guardian, brexit, good news, bad news, reality and perception..as we often do..

Here is a good example of how EVERY publication works:

The story is of interest. About a company the government cited that is now not doing so well. That's always a risk when any government does this, but it's also inevitable. Not every company supported or cited by a government will succeed.

But the story is framed as how Brexit is a disaster for exports. The reader is left in no doubt that their belief going into the article will not have changed by the end.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-customer-left

Only half way through do we see the fact that: "Goods exports from the UK to the EU reached £16.9bn in May, the highest level since figures started in 1997."

Surely that is the bigger story here, no? In a country of 65m people, there will always be good and bad anecdotes to tell, but the bigger picture matters more, surely? It may be inconvenient to the papers editorial stance or what readers want to read but still.

Fixed it for you

[JamesWales]

Fixed it for you

You're right of course, although according to this at least, looking at the two main parties, the Guardian stands out with the Telegraph as having the greatest disparity. Mail, Sun, Times, FT, Mirror etc, all have a more politically diverse readership. The other element being that it thinks of itself as an open minded newspaper and readership, whereas I don't think it is..politically anyway.

https://www.statista.com/chart/9897/...er-readership/

Anyway, like I said, I think the article above illustrates that well. It's like having a headline saying DISASTER AS CHELSEA CONCEDE 20 CORNERS IN ONE GAME and then dropping into it half way through that they won the game 2-1.