The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

A letter to the Herald

Posted on December 19, 2012 by

21st November 2012

Dear Sir,

The Herald was the daily newspaper in our house when I was a child. My parents took both it and the Evening Times. When I started to outgrow the Bunty I eschewed the Jackie and its like and graduated straight to the newspapers. My father cancelled his Evening Times subscription when I was coming up to my Highers because he thought reading two newspapers every evening was interfering with my homework.

I began to have letters published in the paper, and as far as I recall I didn’t have any letter I sent either rejected or edited throughout the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1980s I moved to England and tried my damnedest to continue getting the Herald daily, with mixed success. A postal subscription usually delivered six newspapers together every Saturday, and had to be cancelled. In the end I was reduced to buying it whenever I was in London and could find it on sale.  In the late 1990s I started reading it online.

In 2006 I returned to Scotland, and when I was househunting one of my main stipulations was that the house had to be somewhere a schoolboy could be induced to deposit a Herald on my doormat before 8 o’clock. Reading the actual paper with my breakfast after all these years was one of the great pleasures of my homecoming.

It is a source of immense sadness to me (and possibly to my local newsagent and the above-mentioned schoolboy who is an obliging little fellow) to realise that I have to cancel my Herald subscription. This physically hurts. I actually walked into the newsagent’s shop to do it about six times and came out unable to say the words, until finally I managed to do the deed. My breakfast companions will probably be internet blogs now, in lieu of a newspaper that can deal honestly with political issues and actually tell the truth.

The political bias in the Herald has been becoming too much for me for some time, and since Magnus Gardham’s appointment it has become intolerable. I have also been aware that if I write to the paper, no matter how short or carefully-crafted the letter, it will be edited to add a spin away from the message I had intended to convey. I had thought that online commenting might be freer from editorial manipulation but find that not to be the case.

In recent weeks I have been more and more aware of the intentionally slanted and biased headlines and news stories, and, more disturbingly, of flat-out lies given front-page prominence then belatedly acknowledged in an inch-long column in a corner of an inside page. It’s all too much. If in future I become aware that the Herald is again a paper worth reading, I will be delighted to renew my subscription.

I look forward to that day. In the meantime, after more than 40 years of readership, I must bid you farewell.

Dr Morag Kerr


Dr Kerr’s letter received no reply. After many months of plummetting sales, the Herald recently redesignated itself a regional newspaper rather than a national one, and now only files readership figures twice a year. – Ed

Print Friendly

    56 to “A letter to the Herald”

    1. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Powerful stuff. One has to wonder when the decent staff remaining at the place will down tools and refuse to go along with this nonsense any longer – today’s edition is more proof, were any needed, that Gardham is on a kamikaze mission. The Herald has become a national embarrassment.

    2. H Scott says:

      I could have written the same letter to the Scotsman.

    3. Willie Zwigerland says:

      I wouldn’t quibble about it being a regional paper – it’s no more a national paper of Scotland than the Evening Standard is a national paper of England. You rarely see it in the north-east of Scotland.

    4. CyBOS says:

      When are the professional journalists and other print media staff going to realise they may try to save their glorious Union but they will soon be out of a job. The newspapers cannot keeping going on as more and more people stop purchasing newspapers and increasingly stop visiting MSM news website.

      The level of bias and propaganda in the main stream media is bring about judgement day all the sooner for these organisation! Workfare awaits many print media employees if they don’t get a grip.

      Nobody wants biased reporting either for or against independence – we just want an honest debate facilitated and informed by an impartial media.   

      For goodness sake people, wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late!

    5. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      I did the same two months ago after reading the Herald daily since 1960. There were,as in Morag’s case, lots of final straws. Eventually having a letter printed with the final paragraph rmoved rendering it meaningless combined with jokes about Salmond’s “lies” in the Diary did the trick.

      Complaints sent to the owners Gannett in the US are the only recourse worth pursuing.

    6. Megz says:

      it is really sad that it is coming to this but at the end of the day newspapers are there to report the facts not lies, misrepresentation, smears and bias.  The only way to put an end to it is to realise that individually we may not make a huge difference, but we should all do what is right then we will soon see as a number of individuals we can make a difference.  I refuse to fund something to lie to me (another reason i no longer pay my licence fee) I no longer even give the scotsman the internet traffic and i think i will be doing the same with the herald (even though it was my preferred paper).  

    7. cath says:

      One of my frustrations when I moved to my current flat in the East End of Glasgow, about 2 years ago, was that the newsagent only took a small number of Heralds, so if I wasn’t at the shop before about 9.30am it was guaranteed to be sold out. The tabloid papers would last longer, but were also generally sold out by about lunchtime.
      I’ve stopped buying any paper, Herald included now. But one thing I always notice is the newsagent now almost always has a couple of copies of the Herald on the shelf and generally has stacks of tabloids even by the evening. Now he may have increased his Herald order, but I kind of doubt it.

    8. Ah still read The Bunty.

    9. Caadfael says:

      Despite coming into the 21st century with a makeover of its online publication, the Courier is just as bad!

    10. Celyn says:

      Indeed.  The Glasgow Herald, then the Herald used to be a fine newspaper and an essential part of the day.  

      Is there a real newspaper left now? 

    11. Pa Broon says:

      I grew up with the Scottish Daily Express in our house.

      It certainly explains why in the morning I can be found frothing enthusiastically at some imagined crime involving immigrants/sausages that give you cancer or why supporting Scottish seperation can cause cause Gout. ( I swear to god, I’ve been literally ‘this’ close to phoning Jeremy Vine about something or other…)

      While in the afternoon I can be found hugging my knees while a Diana compilation CD plays on the Hi Fi as I weep gently over the manifold centre spreads and commemorative ‘limited edition’ plates I’ve collected chronicling the People’s Princess’ tortured route through life.

      All while wearing a pair of charming Teflon coated slacks complete with clever elasticated waist and pleated front for maximum comfort.

    12. AndrewFraeGovan says:

      Any Rangers fans at the Herald?

      “Naebody likes us, but we don’t care.” 

    13. Macart says:

      The Herald is a shadow of its former glory days and Morag’s letter is a prime example of what we all feel when reading the tosh served up as objective journalism in our daily news. When it comes to ‘print media staff’, let’s be clear that we’re talking primarily about publishers and editorial staff here. They set the editorial tone for the publications not pre press, printers or finishers. Those of us in production are just working bods like anyone else and there’s a lot of us. I may work in commercial print these days but I have a lot of acquaintances across the print industry who are as dedicated to independence as any on these forums. A number of them post quite regularly. 

    14. Embradon says:

      What other business would knowingly alienate nearly half of its potential market and commit to a dogfight with all its rivals for a meagre share of the other half?

    15. Morag says:

      Has anybody noticed that I didn’t mention in which direction I perceived the bias to be?

      Do you think they’ll be in any doubt?

    16. MajorBloodnok says:

      Morag – only if they bothered to look at it before it went in the bin and even if they did read it I doubt they would be pricked by anything that would register on conscience or principle (if the likes of Magnus actually ever had them).

      Good letter though – you have encapsulated what many in the country feel.  We all (and I mean both sides of the debate) deserve far better from the press.


    17. Morag says:

      Well, when I was in business, and received a letter from a client or customer saying he or she would no longer do buiness with me because of dissatisfaction with my product or services, I bloody well paid attention.

      If they’re throwing letters like that in the bin without even reading them properly, their demise is surer and more imminent than I had imagined.

    18. DougtheDug says:

      I used to be a loyal Scotsman reader from teenage years but I gave up on the Scotsman in the reign of Andrew Neil and switched to the Herald and now I don’t buy either.

      Whether or not you agree with the political slant of these papers their adherence to unionism is not a good commercial strategy in a crowded marketplace.

      Their editorial line locks them into step with the editorial line of the English based newspapers so rather than being national Scottish papers they are simply North British regionals fighting for the same customer base as the English based papers, and they’re losing.

      In a sensible world the nationalist community in Scotland would be proud of their separate Scottish press and would buy Scottish papers because the content would be genuine Scottish opinion and news and also out of a sense of duty to Scotland. However the Scotsman and the Herald have now achieved the remarkable feat of losing the loyalty of independent minded Scots to the point where nationalists have no interest in their survival.

    19. scottish_skier says:

      Excellent letter Morag.

      To chip in on the general topic:

      Based on the figures I have…

      Between 2001 and 2011, there was around a 50% loss of circulation for major Scottish titles (e.g. Record, Herald, Scotsman). The Sun held up and was increasing sales slightly until the infamous 2007 SNP head in noose front page. It then went into decline too, losing nearly 20% of its circulation in just the 4 following years. No wonder it backed the SNP in 2011.

      In contrast, over the same 2001-2011 period, the rUK top 4 lost just 20% of their circulation UK-wide (figures mainly reflecting England); an astonishing difference. I don’t think Scots are any more new media savvy that their southern neighbours. Oh no, something else is definitely going on.

      Interestingly, figures for 2012 suggest the rate of decline in Scots paper sales has accelerated since the SNP took power in May of last year. Certainly appears to be the case for the Scotsman and the Record, which if you did a straight line forwards projection, would be selling no papers at all by 2016/17. Herald looks to be keeping around the same decline rate as before for now, potentially due to the likes of Bell, MacWhirter and the occasional positive story. Sun the same decline rate too; now down ~30% in total since the high prior to 2007.

      Do not underestimate the significance of this; it is saying something very telling about the current collective Scottish electorate’s mindset.

      They are not listening anymore. Wolf has been cried too many times.

    20. Jeannie says:

      Well said, Morag (though I’m a bit worried about the paper boy).  How embarrassing would it be if we started a “Save our Herald for Truth” campaign?

    21. Macart says:


      “However the Scotsman and the Herald have now achieved the remarkable feat of losing the loyalty of independent minded Scots to the point where nationalists have no interest in their survival.”

      I’d say you’ve hit the nail squarely on the head. The eejits running these publications and others just like them, have put thousands of jobs at risk to placate their good good buds in Westminster parties. The safest and surest route to an extended lifespan for printed news was that of objective and impartial journalism. Bad and bad enough that burgeoning new technologies are going to put us old ink monkeys out of work anyhoo, but to have our end hastened by politically biased publishers and journos is simply adding insult to injury. Worst of all, most people on many forums simply won’t give a damn.

    22. Spout says:

      Thank you for sharing the letter.
      It is well written, direct and honest….unlike the editorial policy of The Herald.
      I have a feeling The Herald has always been on the ‘wrong side’ of the self-determination process in the last hundred or so years, the zeitgeist is changing around it now, irrevocably….
      I have also stopped buying any of my regular newspapers (The Herald and The Guardian) –  if only I could unsubscribe from BBC ‘Scotland’.
      After a positive vote in 2014 and a proper SBC (Scottish Broadcasting Corporation) is in place, I hope a flourishing, representative newspaper sector is forced into being.

    23. Ken Mac says:

      A sorry tale but unfortunately not unique. I can’t imagine what they were thinking of when they appointed Gardham. The comments are deteriorating rapidly on the online version. I gave up commenting on the Scotsman long ago. The most disturbing thing about the Herald is that they broach no criticism of their editorials or their journalists pieces. They never allow anything remotely critical on the website.

    24. mutterings says:

      Morag’s experience reminds me of this story. How many more readers can the papers afford to lose?

    25. BillDunblane says:

      I stopped even trying to post comments on the Herald some time ago.

      The Disqus forum they use for comments is the same one I use on many other sites, mostly the Independent, and to the best of my knowledge I have never had a post delayed, deleted or rejected on any of the other sites that use it.   The Herald though, insisted on any comment I made being pre-moderated, and could sometimes take up to two days to appear, and even then would often be edited.

      Given that they allow some people instant access, notably a certain gentleman residing in the west midlands, the pretence that the comments reflect the views of the readership is risible.

    26. velofello says:

      If a Yes vote is the outcome of the referendum I would reckon that there will be demand for a Scottish national paper. Westminster affairs reported under Foreign News!
      Could be Scots Independent and others are biding their time.
      I don’t keep a diary so estimate that I stopped buying the Herald around five years ago. In reality i was eventually paying just to have a crossword each day as the printed stuff was nonsense.The Alec Gallagher frae Largs labourblend letters used to give me a laugh though.

    27. Training Day says:

      I last read the Herald when Jimmy Reid was a columnist.  I later read his collected columns in book form, a process which both charted JR’s disillusionment over the course of a number of years with the Labour Party and reflected the strengthening of his convictions around Scottish independence.  Eloquent, elegaic and fearlessly honest, I would recommend the book to anyone.

      As for the paper for which he wrote, it has long since given up the ghost, the appointment of the former Political Editor of the Daily Record being the most powerful – and surely final – testament to its intellectual collapse.  It does not deserve the custom of anyone who can think for themselves.

    28. Ronald Henderson says:

      I have been attempting to encourage as many people as possible to stop buying newspapers in Scotland that are overtly anti-independence. I don’t enjoy the thought that people will lose their jobs but it is up to the staff that work on these newpapers to make their employers aware of how they fear for their jobs.
      What I am asking people to do is to stop buying these papers. The sales will have to fall in their tens of thousands. It is unlikely that papers like the Record and the Sun will go bust by 2014, but there is a very good chance that we can beat both the Scotsman and the Herald into the soil by the middle of next year.
      With both of them out of the way we will find ourselves in a more level playing field. And a lesson will have been learned that the Scots have had enough of being lied to.
      And I can buy that bottle of 16 years old Isle of Jura Malt whisky that I have promised myself.

    29. velofello, Wee Eck, sometimes comments on Munguin’s Republic, he’s still as funny, though.

    30. Juteman says:

      Well said Morag.
      If the Scotsman and Herald are still on the go by the time of the referendum, then as far as i’m concerned, somebody is funding them simply to spread Unionist propoganda.

    31. muttley79 says:

      @Training Day
      I later read his collected columns in book form, a process which both charted JR’s disillusionment over the course of a number of years with the Labour Party and reflected the strengthening of his convictions around Scottish independence.  Eloquent, elegaic and fearlessly honest, I would recommend the book to anyone.

      I think Jimmy Reid’s book was called Power Before Principles.  I read it in the late 1990s I reckon.

    32. Barontorc says:

      Now perhaps – us too wee, too stoopid, Jock MacPublics, will ask why our Scottish Media Group; the Herald, Sunday Herald and Evening Times, was taken over by an american media giant, which runs successfully USA TODAY, but is prepared to see all of these papers on their knees and almost finished? We’re a tiny country of 5 million and with almost a declining to almost negligible circulation for these papers – what was the attraction?

      Are they also linked to the Johnston Press which is running the Scotsman into extinction?

      Perhaps Jock will also ask, why these papers are broadsiding Scotland with  anti-independence bias as they spiral out of existence, for that very self-same reason?

      Is this the New World Order in operation? Is this why Call Me Dave is so relaxed about the future, all the boxes have already been ticked? Is this why falling sales are not causing sleepless nights, because they are being underwritten?

      It seemed almost an orchestrated operation as all the media went anti-SNP/indepenence and why did the Scotsman take on Gardham to move even further away from popular opinion? Why is there a ban on comments and do they why field a rabid troll operation?

      Why did the BBC close all comments, but only in Scotland and fight complaints to the hilt?

      Newsquest owns and runs what was the SMG and Newsquest is….Gannett Co., Inc.

      ‘ Newsquest is owned by Gannett Co., Inc. a leading international news and information company that publishes 85 daily newspapers in the USA, including USA TODAY, the nation’s largest-selling daily newspaper. The company also owns nearly 900 non-daily publications in the USA and USA WEEKEND, a weekly newspaper magazine. Gannett also operates 23 television stations in the United States and is an Internet leader with many sites sponsored by its TV stations and newspapers, including, one of the most popular news sites on the Web.’

      Answers on the back of an envelope! 

    33. Maybe the Herald is starting to understand its shafting in the sales department as some how the savaging of Micheal Moore by the Lords Committee found its way into print – I presume it was Gardham’s day off.
      The theory around the ‘Westminster’ control of the media being the reason for Westminster complacency would also be bourne out by the questioning of Micheal Moore – who comes across more like the Monty Python character of the same name; sans Lupins.
      The real failing of the Westminster campaign is their inability to deal with the reality that Scots are educated to think from first principles, it is why we are so innovative per head of population. More and more folk are starting to think about just what is, what can be and how Scotland could look as an independent nation. The picture they are creating looks nothing like the ‘doom and poverty’ view spun by the usual Unionist suspects. There is now a growing disconnect between how Scots see ourselves going forward and how the media and Unionist politicians are presenting Scotland going forward. The fall in the circulation of papers spinning the Unionist and trust in BBC Scotland News’ view point is unsurprising.

      A view of the Clydeside TU video of their meeting with La Bailey clearly demonstrates just how wide this gulf now is.

    34. David Milligan - a very Sovereign Scot says:

      What a shame that Gardham is allowed to do this sort of damage to what was once a fine newspaper.  

      Goodbye Herald. 

    35. ronald alexander mcdonald says:


      I wrote to the Herald with much the same sentiments and informed them that I would not be buying the paper again. My main complaints were the character assassination of Martin Sime (for political reasons) and the appointment of Gardham.

      I did receive a response from the then Editor, thanking me for my custom. In addition some nonsense claiming they and Gardham are politically neutral. I responded by thanking him for taking the time to reply, but his content was an insult to my inteligence etc.

      I was a customer of the Scotsman. Then stopped in favour of the Herald. I would urge others who share our sentiment to vote with their feet.          


    36. David Smillie says:

      Gardham was the final staw for me too, although the Herald’s pathetic foreign news coverage also helped end my buying habit.  However, it should be noted that both the Irish Times and Irish ‘Independent’ were rabidly anti-independence during the time of separation of Southern Ireland from the UK, yet both survive.  The Irish Times is even a decent paper though not entirely immune from the falling sales trend.

    37. pmcrek says:


      The Guardian is still a great paper, you just have to tear out any stories about Scotland and bin them before actually reading it.

    38. Tearlach says:

      The Herald and Scotsman? To Paraphrase a certain British General Wolfe in the late 18th Century:-

      “No great mischief if they fall”

    39. David McCann says:

      I just filled in a Scotsman survey, leaving them in no doubt that both they and the Herald are no longer newspapers I would ever buy, due to their quite blatant anti SNP and independence bias.

    40. Dubbieside says:

      I have a theory about the declining sales at the Scotsman and particularly the Herald.

      I think a lot of the drop in sales we have seen up till now was from mainly SNP supporters who were upset about the coverage and lack of balance in these papers from a pro nationalist viewpoint.

      What I believe will happen now is that the genuine neutral who is looking for well balanced and properly researched political news and analysis will be starting to question what is being presented to them everyday. We are now getting the reporters opinion and political stance being reported as fact. How long will that person continue to buy a product that no longer meets his needs?

      Just look at todays political story “North Sea cash warning deals poll blow to SNP” No background on the group who issued this report, or their political leanings. No analysis of the content one part of which was “production could fall due to maintenance or accident” but does production not restart after maintenance or accident and go back to previous levels? “Poll blow to SNP” how exactly? Does not say.

      The Herald may now report circulation figures every six months now, but I would think they will be just as bad if not worse than before.

    41. Donald Kerr says:

      Morag, I could not agree more. I have exactly the same feelings of complete disappointment in the Herald. Since Magnus Gardham’s appointment, things have been worse than ever but he’s probably just writing to the editor’s line. Though the paper has not taken an official view on Scottish independence, I feel that it’s pretty obvious the line that it will take. It has effectively come out against it already and the bias is dreadful. Today’s front page headline, “North Sea cash warning deals poll blow to SNP”, takes me to within one inch of stopping buying daily. I feel sorry for the likes of Iain McWhirter and Ian Bell who I personally think are journalists who are worth their weight in gold but I am at the point where I cannot support this paper any longer.

    42. Donald Kerr says:

      @ Dave McEwan – Gannett, no email address otherwise they would be getting this link and my response as well.

    43. AnneDon says:

      The Scotsman has been a disgraceful excuse for a newspapers since the Barclays appointed Andrew Neil, and that has continued since his (and their) departure. 
      Most schoolchildren in the East of Scotland were told by their teachers to read the paper during the week, The Observer on Sundays,  when they started their English O Grades, guaranteeing them the next generation of readers. I didn’t read it – it was too dull for me. It was quite a dull newspaper, but it was at least factually accurate.
      Neil’s ‘radical’ attacks on civic Scotland, particularly the teaching profession probably put paid to that market;  the newspaper also attacked Scottish companies trying to retain mutuality. It became a byword for partiality – of a particular neo-Con type.
      The Scotsman’s decline, as I say, long pre-dates 2011, and The Herald’s own problems.

      What I cannot understand is their willingness to sacrifice sales figures for ideology!

      After the recent election in the US, GOP supporters realised that believing Fox News was a mistake – they have believed their own propaganda, which was all Fox ‘News’ was broadcasting.  Anyone watching Michael Moore at the House of Lords committee would realise that, taken away from the comforting surroundings of Scottish Questions, or cosy interviews with members of the MSM, nothing Better Together says makes sense.

      Newspaper sales suggest that, whether or not they agree with independence, the Scottish public finds the lack of critical analysis of the political situation in the MSM means they are no longer credible in any way.

      If all you’re doing is a sudoku and a crossword, a free newspaper (even one published by the Daily Mail’s owner) is just as good as a Scotsman.

    44. Ysabelle says:

      @ Donald Kerr

      If it helps, this is Gannet’s FB page. It might be possible to leave a comment with the link:

    45. AnneDon says:

      I’ve had a look at Gannett’s FB page. Wow, they have a LOT of hacked-off customers!

    46. Ysabelle says:

      @ Ann

      I didn’t actually read the comments, I just checked to see if they had the option! Interesting that they have other dissatisfied customers. The Herald is a disgrace.  

    47. Clarification says:

      1. The Herald has no editor, and hasn’t for a couple of months. A replacement has yet to be appointed. The implications of this are both obvious and profound. 

      2. Not all staff there are anti-independence, nor are they all pro-union. Some will be neutral; others disinterested. They do not conform to the giant anti-SNP conspiracy portrayed here. 

      3. The arguments for, and to a lesser degree against, independence need scrutiny.  

      4. This is the first year in many that Herald and Times staff have not been hit with job cuts at Christmas. The suggestion of workplace protests against a political slant is laughable. 

      5. To actively support a campaign to get people to stop buying the paper and bring about its collapse because you disagree with one or more reporters’ opinion is fanatical. Actually it’s vile. Do you know how many families would be left destitute? 

      6. The owners are not in cahoots with their Westminster friends. They’re greedy short-termist profiteers who have spent the better part of a decade asset-stripping the paper to the extent that its noticeable slide in quality is hitting sales, and now revenue, which will no doubt cause more redundancies in the near future. I doubt they’d care if the paper was pro-BNP, pro-Tory or pro-Loony. 

      7. A few of the country’s finest journalists still work there. 

    48. AndrewFraeGovan says:

      I agree with “3. The arguments for, and to a lesser degree against, independence need scrutiny.”, but does this require the publication of flat-out barefaced lies on the front page?

    49. Barontorc says:

      Clarification – the point is, why would a huge US media conglomerate want to buy over the SMG which was showing a declining profit future?
      How come as soon as the SNP took power in Holyrood – Gannett’s Newsquest immediately set up an anti-independence press with a unionist focus?
      Look at Gannett’s move into the UK media and you’ll see a finance trail for acquisitions that just don’t make business sense, particularly from a US perspective.

      Is there evidence here of external forces messing with Scotland’s democratic future? 

    50. Scott Minto (Aka Sneekyboy) says:

      Magnus Gardham. Job Title – Political Editor.

      When it comes to politics, there is indeed a hand on the tiller… 

    51. TheeForsakenOne says:

      Speaking of Magnus Gardham. Anyone seen his hatchet job on Alex Neil in the Herald today? Funnily enough, it doesn’t mention that all the parties excluding Labour accepted the report and that they were satisfied with how things were going with the health boards. All we get is a quote from Jackie Baillie’s hysterical rant in the chamber and a bit of Alex Neil’s response. (No mention of Jackie getting roasted by MSPs of all sides). 

    52. Macart says:

      Surely by this point Gardham deserves to be included in the Zany Comedy Relief column?

    53. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “2. Not all staff there are anti-independence, nor are they all pro-union. Some will be neutral; others disinterested. They do not conform to the giant anti-SNP conspiracy portrayed here.”

      Nobody has portrayed such a thing. A piece earlier this week explicitly noted there was “much to cherish” in both the Herald and Scotsman, and that this site wanted them to survive.

      “5. To actively support a campaign to get people to stop buying the paper and bring about its collapse because you disagree with one or more reporters’ opinion is fanatical. Actually it’s vile. Do you know how many families would be left destitute?”

      Sorry, but that’s a terrible argument. You might as well say it was “vile” to reveal the abuse of the ill and elderly at Winterbourne View, on the grounds that most people there weren’t abusing the patients and there were lots of jobs lost when it was closed. Nobody is obliged to buy a newspaper. If people find the one they’re reading distasteful for any reason, they’re absolutely within their rights to stop purchasing it. Indeed, any other course of action is stupid.

      “7. A few of the country’s finest journalists still work there. “

      See 2. But surely they don’t deserve to have bad colleagues drag them into the abyss? Surely it’s in fact a service to them to highlight where the paper is falling short of acceptable standards?

      There’s nothing wrong with being a Unionist. There’s everything wrong with being a liar.

    54. Kenny Campbell says:

      If you look at the political page from the Herald they buried the hard hitting article on Michael Moore being lambasted by the Lords committee and the Fergie gives £501 and Blair says No stories which were published either side of the Moore story are still there.

    55. A neutral observer says:

      I am not a fan of the Herald – not really a national paper, more a Glasgow local paper but it is certainly not overtly bias, and to suggest otherwise does make you look paranoid. All these people going on about Anti- Independence and pro-Union conspiracy just appear like they have twizzly eyes on stalks, which pushes undecided people away from voting ‘Yes’.

      I have read plenty of bits of the herald that have nationalist apologists, as well people with UK sympathies – guess what, there are different views – it is a Democracy!

      Get a grip on yourselfs..

    56. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I have read plenty of bits of the herald that have nationalist apologists”

      “Apologists”? Hmm, yes, you certainly sound like a “neutral observer”. But (a) we’ve repeatedly noted that the Herald carries some pro-independence views, and (b) there’s a very important difference between news coverage and opinion columns.

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top