Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

1. The simplification of the accusation may just echo what it asserts about the target (just as 'Dumbing Down' is a dumb, dull phrase);

2. If I don't like Triviality, why don't I read nothing but 10-page reports from the former Yugoslavia? It would be hypocritical of me to say that I simply wanted them to be SERIOUS and SOLEMN and RESPONSIBLE all the time. No, that's not it.

What I mean, I suppose, is that too many features, esp. in G2, now look dashed-off - half-hearted, half-baked, unconvincing, just cliché pies really. Today's Lara Croft piece was just the latest of a million examples. It feels (the terms are problematic here, I know) JOURNALISTIC in a bad way - trite, unconsidered, full of crowd- pleasing Received Ideas - rather than JOURNALISTIC in a good way (that is: dogged, resourceful, brave, mentally agile, snappy and what have you).

It's the world of second-hand Lifestyle phrases that bugs me. The way that adults can still write a phrase like "*that* dress" and not hang their heads in shame.

A rider to all my bile, though, is that my previous, more impressed impressions of the Guardian may just reflect youthful impressionability. (Sentence!) Maybe the same kind of crap used to impress me that now feels rubbishy, faux-zeitgeisty and embarrassing? Maybe, but I suspect it's a bit of both.

I agree about Queenan too. But most of all, I agree about Thomson. There's almost no point having a thread about Thomson, because people who know what they think about him already know it all and would just send in superlatives.

What the paper still has going for it: George Monbiot's column, the Diary, Steve Bell, giving review space to Ians Sansom and Penman, and the tv columns of Nancy Banks-Smith. (When N B-S finally pops her clogs I will have to think very hard about buying the paper.)

What is leading the paper ever closer to the abyss: consistently terrible pop coverage (honorable exceptions: Maddy Costa, Betty Clarke); the fatuous new Saturday mag (Zoe Ball on dressing? match the celebrity with the pet? that awful woman talking about words that should be banned??); Charlotte bloody Raven.

I agree with you there. They sucker you in with the G2 front cover (and the masthead of the main paper), but when you get to read the cover story it often appears cobbled together and lightweight. I imagine it must be difficult to fill that space with high quality stories day in day out though.

I actually like Peter Preston's awkward, staccato opinion pieces, come to think of it. But not the pompous ones of Hugo Young. Freedland is sometimes good at summing political issues up, but usually he 'sums up' too much - there's too much glibness in the way he marshals it all. (I admit again, though, that it's easy - even glib - to call someone glib.)

Penman strikes me as a red herring. I can see that he doesn't do that to you, cos you have some kind of investment in his career. I agree about Sansom (great left-back, mean penalty, blah blah) - in fact I think that the whole Saturday book reviews section is quite possibly the best feature of the paper. EXCEPT of course the footy. Heroes? How could I forget David Lacey?

BUT I think that you are wrong about N B-S. It doesn't surprise me that older folk make that judgement about her; it does rather surprise me coming from you. She has skills, I guess, but she's terribly repetitive; uses the same lines on the same topics year in year out. It's all too - yes - glib and easy, while dressed up to look aged and thus wise.

I only read it for the Guide and the job listings. Not that either has been particularly helpful lately... ;-)

There's a lot of irritating stuff, yes. My favourite columnist is George Monbiot, by a mile. Something I like about the Independent when I do get it is that its liberalism is less metropolitan and more about the common good. Needless to say, though, the Guardian's series of articles on public service under that very title were awesome.

Today's G2 seems designed to add fuel to my (f)ire: one page of 'Style' after another, including a column on Why We're So Disappointed That Madonna Employs A Stylist.

Also good in Guardian: John Patterson re. cinema.

oh god, ask hadley today is just... tooth-grinding.

"today"

"At what age is a man too old to wear band T-shirts?"

Martin McCall, by email

"About 15 - that young enough for you, Martin? And to follow one rhetorical question with several more, what in God's name is the point of band T-shirts anyway? To show your allegiance to a band? Do you think anyone else cares? To impress onlookers with your esoteric musical knowledge? See previous reply. To make people stare at your bony chest? Again, I refer you to the first answer. To show that you once attended a live gig? Wow, like, a pair of golden headsets to the guy in the Nirvana '91 T-shirt. In case you happen to bump into the lead singer on the street, he sees that the two of you are kindred souls and therefore invites you to join his band and you then go on the road and have all the manly bonding sessions followed by groupies that your heart could desire? OK, I'll give you that one, although this does suggest that you still harbour the fantasy that you might bump into Joey Ramone in Waterstone's.

"As for ladies in band T-shirts, give me a fricking break. First, gals, a badly cut, poorly made, oversized T-shirt is good for nothing other than wearing to bed and the gym. Second, too often women who wear band T-shirts appear to be going for what we shall call Groupie Chic. It is a style amply modelled by Kate Moss in recent years, and can pretty much be summed up as skinny faded black jeans, ankle boots, a ripped band T-shirt and a cropped fur jacket. In other words, a girlified version of Marc Bolan's or Keith Richards' wardrobe, as though the woman has been so busy, um, sleeping on the band bus she hasn't had time to clean her clothes, so she's now wearing ones belonging to her musical companion. This column has no time for such nonsense."

Yeah, because women have *no* interest in music whatsoever except for sleeping with musicians. What CENTURY is this cretin from?

I think I stopped wearing band T-shirts by the time I was 23. It wasn't necessarily a conscious move tho. I doubt I will ever wear one again tho - I guess it seems lame unless it's an old obscure or overlooked thus hip act (even this I dunno about). I don't notice many people over 20 wearing them. Does Matt DC still have that Save Ferris T?

I only want to sleep with musicians if they are hot as they are (their musical ability is pretty irrelevant in fact).

dear teh grauniad - a long time ago/we used to be friends...

It went downhill after I left.

or were you PUSHED?

http://homepage.mac.com/alexinnyc/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2007-09-02%2015.37.57%20-0700/Image-D15E03FF59A011DC.jpg

heh. (sorry alex, no harm intended)

http://www.abc.net.au/sport/thesportsdesk/images/200607/20060707henrydive_derblog.jpg

xp

i was being harsh really. i don't care what's on other people's t-shirts that much. just trying to work out why i stopped wearing/wouldn't wear band t-shirts myself.

Any t-shirt which isn't plain white clearly sucks that's why.

i couldn't agree less

I still wear band t-shirts if I like the band. Why not? I don't *define* myself or my personality by my music tastes any more, I haven't done that since I was about 18. But that's not the same thing as wearing a band t-shirt.

I suppose the fashion journalist in discussion cannot fathom the idea that clothes are just something you put on, rather than a definition of or statement about your personality.

This is definitely something that happens as you age - or rather, has happened to me as I aged. There's a subtle difference between Statement Clothes and just things you put on.

Guardian editorial worldview circa 2007:

http://www.astucia.co.uk/images/sce/galibier%20tunnel%20_three.jpg

why else would you buy a band t-shirt if not as a statement or definition of personality?

I didn't know it was a band t-shirt okay?

because you're cold xp

In the past I've usually just bought them as a keepsake of a gig I've enjoyed. The piece tracer quotes is idiotic fluff, obv. I'd be embarrased to admit I'd written that.

Because you like the design? Because you like the music? Because it was given to you (this is where most of mine come from)? Because it was a souvenier?

x-post

you wouldn't actually buy a band t-shirt because you liked the design but not necessarily the band tho...would you?

because you like the music = statement/definition of you/your taste

given to you = not you buying

you wouldn't actually buy a band t-shirt because you liked the design but not necessarily the band tho...would you?

No, plus I've only ever bought them @ gigs.

because you like the music = statement/definition of you/your taste

Probably yeah, but w/smaller bands there's also the knowledge that in buying it, yr helping to supposrt the tour.

i actually bought a comets on fire t-shirt solely because the design was so awesome. (it was at a gig, but they hadn't come on stage yet.) then i heard the music and i liked that too. i suppose if i hadn't liked their music, or thought it was boring, it would have posed a problem.

a friend of mine, who shall remain nameless so that alex in nyc doesn't stalk and kill him, bought a huge iron maiden patch when he was 14 and sewed it across the shoulders of his denim jacket. he had never heard a note of iron maiden, but he wound up becoming the biggest iron maiden fan i know, and even sung in a band later, where his vocal style was almost inseparable from bruce dickinson's.

my take on this: do not read hadley freeman.

this resolution made some time ago, stands as strong today as it ever did.

it's a crass and deliberately invidious piece of writing. such an attitude, if sincerely held, could be turned around on pretty much ANY choice of clothing. so forgeddaboudit

the last band t-shirt i bought - robyn!

alan i can't help myself, i know i'm sick and need help.

is there a thread for best band t-shirts? must see

Taste is something that I have. It does not define me. Clothes are something I wear. The statement I am making is "I don't really care about clothes any more."

If I'm going to make a statement about clothes, I'll wear a bright green paisley jacket to a dronerock festival where everyone else is in leather.

I suppose my Hawkwind t-shirt is a statement, it says "ha ha, I'm wearing a Hawkwind t-shirt, I care nothing for fashion, I am wearing the shirt of a band so deeply uncool you can suck my left one because I love them!" But it's certainly not a statement saying that I want to f*ck any of Hawkwind or that I have a musician boyfriend whose Hawkwind t-shirt I'm borrowing, which is the assumption of that article.

> I don't notice many people over 20 wearing them.

*SOBS*

> you wouldn't actually buy a band t-shirt because you liked the design but not necessarily the band tho...would you?

EAR t-shirt with the putney on the front = great. EAR live = terrible. (EAR on CD = ok, plus pram and stereolab were supporting)

"Do you think anyone else cares?"

the core MOTOR of fashion is YES OF COURSE I THINK OTHER PEOPLE CARE THAT I AM WEARING... WHAT'S "IN". no less dumb than wearing something else that forms part of your identity. so it's just a puerile throw away bit of nonsense. heh. fashion in 'being puerile' shocker.

I gave up caring whether I was too old to wear band t-shirts or whatever a long time ago. Really, if you're getting that worked up about what other people are wearing, the joke's on you, I think. To paraphrase - "Do you think anyone else cares?"

Yesterday I wore an X-Ray Spex t-shirt. I am 31. Oh noes.

If a FAC 51 Hacienda T-shirt counts as a band t-shirt, I am wearing one NOW. I am more than 31.

Unless you buy shirts at arena shows or whatever they cost a tenner or less which is cheaper than t-shirts tend to be (aside from plain ones from Primark or something). I guess it bugs fashiony people cos it's fashion for people who don't give a shit about fashion

Squeezed Stewards sounds like a particulary unappetizing traditional English dessert.

"but what about the squeezed stewards"

I'm just always catching this same conversation in the background in UK public houses

the fact that Farage is openly talking about the minimum wage being too high tells me that he's more interested in beetroot-faced pensioners that shout at clouds rather than the "working right" a ropey cohort label that carries the assumption that anyone who is working class is bigoted and dumb enough to vote against their own interests (yes some do but there are limits imo and even Farage will know this). There is probably an interesting article that could be made from polling data about the Reform surge, but this really fucking is not it.

"And what's bothering you, Mr Starmer?"
"I'm worried about squeezed stewards."
"Well in future try not to wear such tight trousers."

https://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server4900/364bb/products/170652/images/126364/187841__47868.1342533747.500.500.jpg?c=2

obvs by "steward" they mean "custodian" but i can't shake the impression that they're talking about the guys in high-viz who get into football games for free in exchange for telling off kids for swinging on the fences

the polling data is from Hope Not Hate which is an utterly wretched Labour Right org made up of absolute racist cunts cosplaying as anti-fascists, the kind of tossers that should be kicked very hard in the stewards!

Rest in piss

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/17/rachel-cooke-obituary

"She and I bonded as colleagues over our support for single-sex spaces and sports, and became friends."

lol I was wondering if she was one of that lot, there you go

Lord save us from liberal, left-leaning and surprisingly sensitive twats like this idiot.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/dec/03/scott-galloway-masculinity-crisis-notes-on-being-a-man

"...the Premier League is just fantastic – there’s nothing like it."

Go back to America you arsehole.

I've become very interested in these "positive" masculinity influencers, just seems a grift obviously. Some of the shit he says in that interview is insane once it gets going.

By interested I mean, maybe a subject for satire.

lol fuck this "moderate"

 he couches largely in economic terms. “I tell my sons, when you’re in the company of women, you pay for everything. And if you can’t, you don’t go out … A woman is not going to have sex with a man who splits the bill with her.” Signalling resource is one of the three things women find most attractive, according to another of his maxims, along with kindness and intellect. 

multimillionaire who looks like something that crawled out of the cheese says: chicks dig money!

it's not even that reconstructed is it?

He is, after all, a wealthy, healthy, white, heterosexual, shaven-headed, 61-year-old Californian who made his name and fortune as a successful investor and podcaster.

But in reality, he is almost the opposite: liberal, left-leaning and surprisingly sensitive.

Guardian writers thinking out loud must be pure comedy.

“Let me offer that the reason we elected him is because of struggling with men.” Two groups that pivoted hardest towards Trump in 2024, he says, were young men, and women aged 45 to 64, and “my thesis is that’s the mothers of young men.” While Trump embraced the manosphere, the Democrats championed the interests of virtually every special interest group except young men, he argues.

Hilarious timing. From the "data" of US elections across several states this year its saying that almost all of Trump's gains have been wiped out in the last year.

I know wealthy podcaster or whatever but why would white and heterosexual be the opposite of being sensitive and "liberal"?

"although he doesn't appear vibrant"

Looks Scottish and is.

“Almost the opposite” there is referring to the sentence just before about alpha male podcast bros or whatever, it’s still bollocks but it makes a bit more sense than implying sensitive is the opposite of healthy

Or bald, lol

he is a Galloway. oh why couldn't all of them have fucked off to America

If this guys sons are sound they must think he’s an embarrassing prick

Said it before and I'll say it again, the absolute worst douchebags are the ones who tell you they're "reclaiming" masculinity, nationalism, whatever. It's a guaranteed "reactionary fud incoming" signal

I preferred it in the 70's when a leading right-wing pundit (Norris McWhirter) could get executed on his doorstep by reconstructed positive masculinity influencers (the provisional IRA).

It was his brother.

oh yeah, easy mistake to make, they were twins and both were neo-nazi, pro-apartheid lunatics!

you can tell them apart, Ross was the one with bullet holes

Norris was the one who demanded the arrest of Douglas Hurd for treason for signing the Maastricht Treaty. T'other freak wanted any arrested Irish nationalists to face death penalty for treason!

Sorry fell asleep listening to a podcast on this last night.

part of the James Goldsmith clique of reactionary liberatarians I believe

AKA "the worst people in Britain"

it's curious that he was apparently an Mi5 asset and had chatted a lot of shit and put down a bounty of the today-money equivalent of half a mill on the RA provo gang that was running roughshod through London. And there was no police detail guarding his house? Maybe they also thought he was a cunt and just had a leave him to it attitude!

I suspect that's exactly what they thought.

On a lighter note, I was struck by the enormous, nay ludicrous amount of puff-pieces the newspaper commissioned for Lily Allen's new album. There was Lily Allen’s new album shows the pain behind the 'cool girl' myth – that's why women are obsessed with it*, Who is Lily Allen's Madeline about?, Divorce and desire power Lily Allen's autofictional comeback, Lily Allen's West End Girl is funny, sexy, jawdropping etc, Lily Allen: West End Girl (is) a gobsmacking autopsy of marital betrayal, a piece about open relationships that ties in with the album, Why Lily Allen has broken the internet**, and Ace Frehley, Kiss lead guitarist and band's co-founder, dies aged 74, which technically doesn't have anything about Lily Allen in it, but I wanted to make this paragraph slightly longer.

This is without counting the general opinion pieces that mention the album. It "broke the internet" so hard that after peaking at number 2 it dropped out of the top ten a fortnight later. Meanwhile in the United States it charted for two weeks and peaked at #93, which - to be fair - is much higher than I would expect for a mid-2000s cheeky cockney gorblimey throwback.

This grew from a thread on a rival website on the topic of lyric-focused reviews. After skimming through all of the above I still have no idea what the album actually sounds like. The articles either focus on nothing at all, or something that exists in the writer's head, or they're based loosely on a couple of short lyric snippets. Does it have rapping? Does it have synthesisers, guitars? Does it have donk noises? I have no idea.

I mean, given that Allen's BBC podcast has now ended she must be short of a bit of money, and it's great that a bunch of quite well-off white women have clubbed together to give her a bit of a boost, but can't they do so privately? Can't they just write her a cheque, or offer to loan her some money interest-free, or offer to buy something from her for considerably higher than the market rate? It just seems like internal party communication not intended for public consumption.

* "I don't think that's why women of all ages have spent the past week listening to the album over and over on repeat, quoting scraps of it in their group chats" - I must have missed this.

Just yesterday I discovered Lily Allen's debut appearance from 2002. No need for thanks. Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FyuVR4vbZQ

Lily tweeted a picture of her boyfriend's penis dressed up as a golliwog as part of an argument with a black person.

and yet she's somehow become a national treasure

perhaps that was the closest she ever really got to *breaking the internet*. God I hate celebrities. When there is full communism they will be outlawed.

it's actually a cool thought "what would art be like if it had to be produced under conditions of anonymity?"

not that i'm accusing Lily Allen of being an artist

that is a fucking cool idea!

the state sponsored post-capitalism shitpostery era of art, music and literature might even be shit, but still it's a cool idea!

all the narcissism, corruption and bullshit of celebrity grifters reigned in by hard state regulation.. yess

and then just to horrify Helen Lewis (and all other privileged snobs) and maybe even finish off her career, a flat out classless meritocracy on journalism, literature and general employment in the creative industries. Obv it would have to start by excluding people from elite families, universities, private schools etc.. and send them to clean the sewers.

and yet she's somehow become a national treasure

Supposedly beloved national treasures are so often “things you hate that are not socially acceptable to hate”.

didn't you used to have to be around for at least as long as Morecambe & Wise or Delia Smith were or whatever before your agent bestows that title on you? or have some international cache like Benny Hill or Rowan fucking Atkinson.

is "Youth" on Little Simz's latest album aimed at Lily Allen?