The British Press

On my previous visits to the UK, you’d have found me an avid consumer of British newspapers, snapping up different titles from the newsstands and devouring the contents within which much gusto. That’s the peril of being a news junkie.

But things have moved on since. The only print papers I read regularly these days are the newly-launched London Lite and The London Paper – free evening tabloids with hardly any serious news in them, but laden instead with juicy gossip about Kate Moss and Pete Doherty, Prince William and Kate Middleton, Britney Spears and God-Knows-Who, latest fashion trends, the travails of London living etc…You get the idea. Some prefer one title over the other in this ongoing battle between the two. I’m pretty agnostic, and am happy to take copies of both.

But don’t get me wrong. I still track the news closely, except that I now read the papers on-line, in particular the Daily Telegraph and The Times. One is conservative-leaning, while the other is more middle-of-the-road. On weekends, however, I’d shell out a few quid to get the massive Saturday and Sunday editions, packed with sections upon sections of news and reviews. The Singapore Doctor has been kind enough to help get the papers on my behalf on those weekends I’ve been away. For this is English-language journalism at its best – something which we don’t get in back home, for a number of reasons.

Occasionally, I’ve been picking up other titles, though - I must state for the record – not the one that features this. Click at your own risk. It’s good to scan the wide range of perspectives out there, although I would admit a strong dislike of the Independent. It’s anything but. What I can’t stand about the Independent is its sanctimonious, holier-than-thou attitude which reflects nothing more than liberal, chattering-class received wisdom. If you hate America, love the state and supranational organizations, and believe unquestioningly in a variety of “progressive” causes, then this is the paper for you.

But of course, unlike the US, the British press tradition doesn’t carry as high a level of pretension to objectivity. But this means that newspapers here are often more fun and entertaining to read. I spent a few years in Washington earlier this decade going through ponderous titles such as The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal on a professional basis each day. It’s difficult to characterise it well, but American journalism is often more stuffy and self-important than what one finds in the UK, with the writing frequently bloated beyond necessity.

Surveying the British print media, I’m reminded again of a scene from Yes, Prime Minister – one of the all-time greatest British comedy series. In the episode, “A Conflict of Interest”, circa 1987, Cabinet Secretary and career civil servant Sir Humphrey Appleby was about to proffer his views on the British media, when he was cut short by Prime Minister Jim Hacker.

“Don’t tell me about the press,” snapped Hacker, who, as a politician, was obviously more adept at dealing with the media. “I know exactly who reads the papers:

• The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
• The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
• The Times is read by people who actually do run the country;
• The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
• The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
• The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
• And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is."

Responding, Sir Humphrey asks, “Prime Minister, what about the people who read the Sun?”

“Sun readers don’t care who runs the country, so long as she’s got big tits,” suddenly intoned Bernard Woolley, the PM’s Principal Private Secretary.

Hilarious, innit? And still amazingly perceptive.