About me
About me

The date is set…


Warning: This post was published more than 12 years ago.

I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!

But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views might have changed in the 12 years since I wrote this post.
  • This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.

Many thanks for your understanding.

…and it’s 12th September. The Guardian will, quite literally, never be the same again.

This 716th post was filed under: Media.

More posts worth reading

What I’ve been reading this month (published 6th November 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 5th October 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 3rd September 2017)

I will not make bad graphs (published 25th April 2014)

Merry Christmas! (published 25th December 2005)

Wetherspoon pubs to ban smoking (published 24th January 2005)

Planned maintenance downtime (published 20th May 2007)

Comments and responses

Comment from Barnaby Olthwaite

by Barnaby Olthwaite

Comment posted at 20:40 on 3rd September 2005.

It has never been the same since they removed “Manchester” from the masthead!

Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)

by sjhoward

Comment posted at 22:56 on 3rd September 2005.

Very true, but the editor says that this current change is even bigger than that one – it will certainly be interesting to see what they’ve come up with… And, for the record, I think it’s still the most northerly aware of the broadsheets, which tend to think that that anywhere north of Coventry is not worthy of coverage.

Comment from Samuel Pickwick

by Samuel Pickwick

Comment posted at 19:47 on 4th September 2005.

Is a change for the sake of change, such a good thing?

If this is such an unprecedented change, will it not alienate the established readership of The Guardian?

Will the change attract more new readers than those it loses?

Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)

by sjhoward

Comment posted at 16:43 on 5th September 2005.

It’s certainly not change for change’s sake – it’s change to try and reverse, or at least attentuate, the plummeting sales figures. I’m certainly concerned that it might alienate the established readership – myself included – and I guess we just have to hope that it arracts more than it loses, without it been driven to become such a populist paper (though, of course, with its Scott Trust ownership, sales figures are far from the be all and end all with The Guardian in quite the same way they are for everyone else)

Compose a new comment


You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.

The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.