The Guardian Reviews 

Some good journalism but it is the comment section that annoys me. Any comment that is not wildly left-wing or in any way takes issue with other commentators going on a communist-leaning rant is blocked by the invigilators.
There is no debate other than total agreement with wildly left-leaning political thinking. Anything else is either lynched or cancelled.

Disappointed by the journalism from Moria Donegan who clearly hasn’t done proper research before writing an article on Charlie Kirk. If you watch his debates you would know he doesn’t resort to shouting as claimed and does not make sexist or racist remarks. Please actually watch his debates rather than recycling misinformation.

Also another article from a separate journalist quotes “If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024
You’ve taken this remark totally out of context. If you bothered to research you would understand Charlie was against lowering of standards just to recruit more minorities, he said he cared about excellence and didn’t care about the race of the pilot, just that they all had the same standards to get qualified. He wasn’t against pilots being black or otherwise, just they all needed the same pass rate to be equally skillful. This lowering of standards required for minorities to recruit more minorities is unique to America, but if you don’t understand this please stop writing articles about a topic you haven’t researched. Charlie has massive followings in America from all genders and races. If he was just spewing hate I don’t think this would be the case do you?

Three stars, not because I suffer from lead poisoning and live by reactionary views, but because of the spineless "Accept cookies, or pay to reject" trash a lot of UK sites have pushed out in the last year. Other than that, It's a fine hub of journalism.

Despite the frothing rants of some delusional right wingers, the Guardian is not "neo communist"... The Guardian is a pretty wishy washy, barely left of centre, London centric paper. Generally reliable, not beholden to corporate interests (it is owned by a trust, not a billionaire oligarch). Environmental reporting is generally good, but I'm really not interested in "fantasy homes near golf courses". Despite other comments, the online version is free, not behind a pay wall.

I am always impressed by the standard and content of Guardian reporting which I judge to be second to none. As an honorary researcher in the Lancaster University Centre for Alternatives to Social and Economic Inequalities I find it an excellent resource.

Nearly every review here gives one star or five stars, depending on whether the reviewer is the type who uses the word 'libtard' or the type they're talking about. I'm a paying 'supporter' of the Guardian, so I suppose the one-star reviewers would call me a 'libtard' too. But I have too many reservations about the Guardian to give it five stars. I don't like its self-righteousness on certain matters, such as who's allowed to advertise. I'll receive an email boasting about how they've banned ads from gambling firms or big oil – and then asking me to increase my monthly payment because they're broke. Well, stop censoring advertising! They've also forced out a few journalists for expressing gender-critical views. I may not agree with those views but I think there should be a place for both sides of that debate in the Guardian.

Despite these and other concerns, such as its relatively thin world news coverage (c'mon, just reprint more stories from reputable news agencies if you can't afford more foreign correspondents of your own), I believe that Guardian is more truthful and better written than other UK newspapers, except possibly the FT, which is too expensive for me and doesn't cover a broad enough range of subjects.

Unfortunately I found the articles to be very “left-leaning”. I was looking for an unbiased paper, without any political affiliation, but alas found The Guardian to be far from this. As a British person I found this paper to be about as un-British as it could be & therefore ended up doubting their articles. I was also put off with the paper’s biased views on other journalists, they seem to think that other publications are lying which is a little “off” shall we say.

Propaganda masqueraded as news. People commenting favourably seem to say that people who don't trust it just aren't clever enough , or bias by their political views, ignoring how these clever people can't understand how clearly the guardian obfuscates the truth and propagates division and mistrust

The Guardian is one of, if not the only, papers in UK today where the news is reported truthfully and with integrity. If an article has the Guardian stamp I know I am getting well sourced and researched reporting. It leans a little to the left, as do I, and I may not always agree with every word, but if I want to know the truth about something, I would trust the Guardian above all other journals.

Ridiculously biased. Finally had enough after the criticism of US leaders attempting to address the South African leaders leading a movement to murder farmers.

The guardian is without question corrupt, all your reports are bias from a leftist evil corrupt opinion without merit or truth.

Guardian is owned by the Scott Trust to ensure editorial independence, free from bias.

Fearless independent investigative journalism, speaking fact. Deservedly award winning. Globally revered and regarded by many repressed readers around the world as an essential news platform to discover the truth about what’s happening within their own country.

Complete greedy ripoff to the working class person in the UK .
This so called paper has always supported useless governments. Now they are charging you a fee to accept harmful cookies and hated adverts ...of you say no to the payment they block all their stories.
That's ok I've boycotted your paper never to read it again

Labour would not last. Were it not for the fact that all of the major players the media are playing along with one of the worst collection to ever to form a gov within living memoray . Certainly Parliament has not been in such a rump state since 1642. Poverty continues to increase and the country is still in rapid economic and cultural decline . Unskilled migrants pour in and take up zero hour jobs or worse . To keep the rich and offshore string pullers of Starmar in their greedy obesity of self interest .
However the toxic press continue to feed a brained drained nation stories about tv chefs getting fruity rather then examine let alone be a critic in relation to Reeves disgusting conduct and her own ineptness . We all know that if the media switched gears and reported on actual matters of national importance Starmer and his rapacious collective would be experiencing a harsh change of their own climate of personal gain similar to what we saw in the eastern part of the world over a decade ago.
As it is Labour Mp's ignore their day job and Labour enabled by corrupt unions carry on to enrich their lead players front pockets while the country evaporates

Terribly biased and arrogant "journalism". They censor stories based on their political leanings, and inflate stories that enforces their narratives. A publication that has set out its own agenda can't be trusted to report events impartially nor give honest and full coverage. They are arrogant enough to think they can define what are the "facts". They have many double standards at the editorial level on all pertinent topics affecting society. The face of the so-called "authoritative media".

This is a better site than the "Red" reviewers say.
It is open about being against the flood of fact-free attacks on news and opinions.
If you read with thought and seeking to understand multiple viewpoints, this is a useful source of info.
As usual the Reds talk about "freedom of speech" and truth, but then organize campaigns to discredit anyone who disagrees with them.
I'm an average middle of the road, ex-republican and very disappointed with the low road they are now on. The Guardian is one of the few that stand up.

One of the worst news outlets I have ever read. You can tell they are bias libtards. There is a notification on their page that states " We will not bow to president trump
" , what a bunch of clowns. I hope that outlet goes out of business and the journalists and editors work at mcdonalds after some of the disgusting articles I have read on their website. GARBAGE

A neoliberal rag which pushes division and hate. Most writers are authoritarians who will only accept those who agree with them without question.

Pre 2014 the Guardian was sat between centre left and moderate left. Its articles would be left wing but you could trust that it would include all the facts and wouldn't lie to get it's readers to have a particular viewpoint. I've noticed that since then this has completely changed and that's not a good thing. Now it's one of the biggest progressive left propaganda machine out there and they've done this at the expense of their journalistic integrity.

The Guardian both online and in its print articles now lies by omission, pushed emotional arguments as facts, misrepresents quotes and worst of all quotes their own journalists opinion pieces in factual arguments and then treats said opinion as fact. There are are scientist and experts who have taken to social media and have outed the Guardian as having misrepresented what they've said in order to push their own agenda in their articles. They've even shared their correspondence emails to prove it. I've personally seen their journalists leave out important facts of stories to try and frame one group as a villain and misrepresent the story. They do this a lot, they need to write in some sort of right wing bogie man to the majority of their arguments even when there just isn't one.

By all means have your political leanings. By all means be part of the progressive left but make sure you include all of the facts so that readers can verify what they're reading and so that you're letting them come to their own conclusions.

Very good.

Lots of detail, evidence based news stories. Even sports coverage is in depth.