Has the Times sacked its Media Correspondent? Scrolling through its news list and it’s missed a huge story involving the monarchy, journalist ethics and a billion pound cover up at a hugely powerful media organisation. Surely more important than whether dogs suffer from January blues? - ThreadSky

rorycj.bsky.social • 31 days ago

Has the Times sacked its Media Correspondent? Scrolling through its news list and it’s missed a huge story involving the monarchy, journalist ethics and a billion pound cover up at a hugely powerful media organisation. Surely more important than whether dogs suffer from January blues?

Comments

anyazolo.bsky.social•31 days ago

Ok, but what did they say about dogs getting the January blues? (Here in the US, most of the media is either owned by or now cowed by the new regime. Conveniently absent coverage is becoming the new reality here as well.)

cc-jacqueline17.bsky.social•31 days ago

It is not a serious newspaper anymore. Just terminated my subscription and told them why.

gavfr.bsky.social•31 days ago

Wow, I’ve just read it and it’s only when you said this that I realised it wasn’t mentioned

quingo-scooters.bsky.social•31 days ago

Owned by News International (Rupert Murdoch). The newspapers in question are owned by his son Lachlan. Not hard to join the dots.

dermotsmith.bsky.social•31 days ago

Even more puzzlingly the story doesn't show up if you search for 'Harry'.

gilesgraphics.bsky.social•30 days ago

I think it may be time for decent people to make their own press

copybot.bsky.social•31 days ago

It is shocking how far the times had declined under its current editor. I pay a pound a month or something for a subscription and that’s far too much.

jsewtz.bsky.social•31 days ago

Oh lords I pay more. Switched from Guardian. Thinking of switching to FT.

copybot.bsky.social•31 days ago

I do pay for the guardian as I think it’s important it exists. It’s not great at the moment though.

copybot.bsky.social•31 days ago

It’s expensive though.

macca77.bsky.social•31 days ago

Tony Gallagher is awful. 100 % Murdoch tabloid stock.

Seems to think all Times readers want is yoga and diet articles. Stopped reading along time ago.

jeannettesmyth.bsky.social•31 days ago

As an old WaPostie I am waiting for Sir Will's indictment.
And I'm shocked, shocked, the toothless Times of London has no coverage or what is probably the worst press corruption story of all time.

mev202.bsky.social•31 days ago

Mmm...I wonder why the times is not featuring the story.

danesclose.bsky.social•30 days ago

Not just The Times.
Can't really call the Telegraph's coverage reporting

sjbof.uk•31 days ago

They've all got their eccentricities. I've now cancelled BBC and will stick with Sky who at least don't promote Farage every day.

johnglenn.bsky.social•31 days ago

Cancelled BBC?

goatteeboy.bsky.social•31 days ago

There was an article with the full text of the apology in the digital edition. But they couldn’t resist having one last dig. Of course comments were turned off.

jsewtz.bsky.social•31 days ago

In today's Times....I suppose they know how to make CEOs the face of their business.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/83df90a6-aa87-48ad-8c55-c31c8b96b485?shareToken=c173d48302223da2c4e6355ceee3179f

jsewtz.bsky.social•31 days ago

It was tucked away yesterday with comments turned off.

syiow.bsky.social•31 days ago

Will nip to the library later for a look.

ahelminger.bsky.social•31 days ago

https://www.thetimes.com/article/7be4ce60-7cac-4776-a98d-933cc8ebe79d

daviduknorthwest.bsky.social•31 days ago

Indeed, it’s an intriguing dilemma. Could it be because the current editor previously edited the Sun?

sonnet-lumiere.bsky.social•31 days ago

If true, I'm surprised Harry's lawyers didn't make a statement of apology in Murdoch's gutter stable a condition of the settlement.

blackcanine.bsky.social•31 days ago

But every Times editor always says that the evil old fossil has no influence at all over content. It's just coincidental that the editors somehow end up always doing what Rupe wants.