This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Sydney Morning Herald article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I find the description about the Daily Telegraph to lean towards being biased. You may want to try rewording it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.183.142 ( talk) 06:51, 25 March 2005 (UTC)
I am changing the sensationalistic in the description of the Daily Telegraph, this seems bias in disscussing a papers reporting practices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.13.52 ( talk) 12:34, 23 June 2005 (UTC)
The Sydney Morning Herald? Cente Right? Get out! The paper openly supported the Labor Party in the last election! Ronan.evans 03:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
The SMH is undoubtedly a center left paper and it should be stated as so. It is similar to the Australian as it has a lot of hard news but there are numerous examples of its writers and editorial page display a clear moderate left bias. Furthermore anyone who reads the pages of the Letters to the editor will see that nearly 90% of those letters reflect readers with left to very left views. Examples of specific left leaning writers include: Ross Gitins in Business - overtly pro Keynesian, pro high taxation and larger size of govt - these are clearly Center left views and cannot be described as centrist. Despite the current Federal Govts large govt spending his columns are laced with ideological opposition. There are many other examples, Elizabeth Farrelly on planning; Jacqueline Malley; Waled Aly; Peter Fitzsimmons - I could go on and on. One more example - the OECD says Australia has the second highest taxes on profits and wages yet - the SMH has been relentless in its campaign against the current govts tax cuts - despite most economists describing them as offering mere compensation for bracket creep. In general on any economic matter - the SMH references the left wing Australia Institute with no disclosure as to it’s links to the Labor party. Please be fair and update this page to reflect its clear center left ideological position. Dulwichhillecon ( talk) 12:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
The suggestion that the Herald has “recently become more right wing” is not supported by the book cited at footnote 23. To suggest that Peter Costello is “in charge” of the Herald is incorrect, and it is also incorrect to suggest that the Herald has recently become more right wing, particularly given it endorsed Labor at the 2019 and 2022 federal elections, the first time it endorsed Labor since 2007. This suggests that the Herald has in fact recently become more left-wing. User6784 ( talk) 05:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
A roster sounds like the list of players in an American football team. I have never before seen it used to describe such a list in Australia. How about simply "List of Journalists"? HiLo48 ( talk) 05:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Sydney Morning Herald article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I find the description about the Daily Telegraph to lean towards being biased. You may want to try rewording it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.183.142 ( talk) 06:51, 25 March 2005 (UTC)
I am changing the sensationalistic in the description of the Daily Telegraph, this seems bias in disscussing a papers reporting practices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.13.52 ( talk) 12:34, 23 June 2005 (UTC)
The Sydney Morning Herald? Cente Right? Get out! The paper openly supported the Labor Party in the last election! Ronan.evans 03:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
The SMH is undoubtedly a center left paper and it should be stated as so. It is similar to the Australian as it has a lot of hard news but there are numerous examples of its writers and editorial page display a clear moderate left bias. Furthermore anyone who reads the pages of the Letters to the editor will see that nearly 90% of those letters reflect readers with left to very left views. Examples of specific left leaning writers include: Ross Gitins in Business - overtly pro Keynesian, pro high taxation and larger size of govt - these are clearly Center left views and cannot be described as centrist. Despite the current Federal Govts large govt spending his columns are laced with ideological opposition. There are many other examples, Elizabeth Farrelly on planning; Jacqueline Malley; Waled Aly; Peter Fitzsimmons - I could go on and on. One more example - the OECD says Australia has the second highest taxes on profits and wages yet - the SMH has been relentless in its campaign against the current govts tax cuts - despite most economists describing them as offering mere compensation for bracket creep. In general on any economic matter - the SMH references the left wing Australia Institute with no disclosure as to it’s links to the Labor party. Please be fair and update this page to reflect its clear center left ideological position. Dulwichhillecon ( talk) 12:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
The suggestion that the Herald has “recently become more right wing” is not supported by the book cited at footnote 23. To suggest that Peter Costello is “in charge” of the Herald is incorrect, and it is also incorrect to suggest that the Herald has recently become more right wing, particularly given it endorsed Labor at the 2019 and 2022 federal elections, the first time it endorsed Labor since 2007. This suggests that the Herald has in fact recently become more left-wing. User6784 ( talk) 05:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
A roster sounds like the list of players in an American football team. I have never before seen it used to describe such a list in Australia. How about simply "List of Journalists"? HiLo48 ( talk) 05:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)