Talk:The Sydney Morning Herald

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Flag The Sydney Morning Herald is part of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney.
WikiProject Australia To-do:

I find the description about the Daily Telegraph to lean towards being biased. You may want to try rewording it.

I am changing the sensationalistic in the description of the Daily Telegraph, this seems bias in disscussing a papers reporting practices.

Contents

[edit] Bias, what?

What's the deal with

Although more journalistly responsible than The Daily Telegraph, several of the paper's leading journalists, particularly Miranda Devine and Gerard Henderson are well known for their so-called "conservative" (right-wing) views and in previous times the Herald was noted for its conservatism.

The phrase 'although more journalistically responsible' seems to suggest a dichotomy with journalistic integrity on the one hand and conservatism on the other. Doesn't this sound more NPOV

The modern Herald is noted for its journalistic integrity and editorial balance, with both left leaning contributors like David Marr and cartoonist Michael Leunig, and conservative writers such as Miranda Devine and Gerard Henderson. However, historically the paper has been characterised as a right of centre counter-point to the liberal Melbourne Age, especially during David Syme's tenure as editor of the latter.

This article must be improved to compete with The Age's!

Sir Politic, KBE 15:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Does The Sun-Herald deserve its own page?

I mean, besides a redirect back here? Also, there is an American paper called the Sun Herald in Mississipi. It doesn't have a page at the moment, but it has a few red links. So (this is probably not the right place to do this, but anyway) I propose we have The Sun Herald as a disambig, leading to The Sun Herald (Australian newspaper) and the The Sun Herald (American newspaper) (US newspaper?) And hyphens, I'm not sure how they should be handled...

pages that want to link to the American newspaper:

pages that want to link to the Australian newspaper:

pfctdayelise 15:03, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Go for it. The Sun-Herald deserves its own page, it is related to the SMH but isn't just a Sunday version of the SMH. There are different editors, reporting staff, editorial policies, etc. They do have the same owners, and they have similar typography, but that's about all they have in common. The hyphen should be included in the title too. --Humehwy 04:40, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Move to Sydney Morning Herald?

Am I tripping, or did this used to be there? But there's nothing in the move log, so... weird.

Anyway should this actually be at the above address? I have a feeling there's a wikipolicy on not having "The" in the title, even if that's the official name. eg. University of Melbourne. Thoughts? pfctdayelise (translate?) 13:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

The proper name of the paper is "The Sydney Morning Herald". The article should stay as it is. --Centauri 19:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ethics policy

An earlier edit of this article removed the information on the Herald's ethics policy. This was the reason given: (→Journalism - everyone newspaper has an ethics policy, not worth mentioning in such detail especially if only marketing prose is going to be used)

This is in fact not true - outside of the general code of ethics which applies to all working journalists in Australia, only The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald have published ethics polities which apply to the journalists they employ.

The reason the document is distinct from the general code of ethics (published by the MEAA, the journalist's union) is the Age/Herald ethics policy is far stricter - prohibiting a range of activies, including junkets, gifts etc, which are routinely accepted by other newspapers.

To my knowledge the only newspapers in the US and UK which have similar policies are the Guardian (UK), the LA Times, NY Times and Washington POst (US). (150.101.112.232 10:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC))

[edit] POV edit

An edit was just made to the article about the use of the word football, which was highly POV:

Controversially the Sydney Morning Herald has decided to call soccer "football". Rugby League is accepted as football in Sydney although the Herald had been calling AFL "football" for the previous few years. This move was met with almost universal condemnation and has been percieved as foreign "English cultural imperialism" as the editor, Alan Oakley, originated from England. Oakley controversially refused to publish condemnatory letters about the move, only publishing positive letters. Although an accepted practice in Murdoch tabloids, this was looked down upon by many who thought that Fairfax had higher standards. The Sydney Morning Herald sales have since continued to decline.

It might have some place, but the attribution of declining sales to the use of the word football to describe soccer is ridiculous. --AMorris (talk)●(contribs) 08:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Centre Right?

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) u stupid idiot- it was said 2 be centre left--- i smell the words of liberalism, and so called "conservatism".

Better tell those paragons of bleeding heart liberalism Miranda Devine and Gerald Henderson they're with the wrong paper in that case. --Centauri 05:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
They're exceptions. The overall editorial leaning of the paper is centre-left. mgekelly 07:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Can we just sit on the fence and describe it as centrist? The paper's editorial position depends on the issue. It generally leans towards economic and social liberalism, but that's a very broad generalisation. --Kewpid 08:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
the paper decided in 2004 that it would no longer offer an editorial endorsement of either side in elections. seems pretty determinedly centrist to me Dibo 07:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Is "political allengience" necessary? Anyhow, I for one agree that 'centrist' is the most accurate description; publishing stories on 'social issues' doesn't make it a lefty. Htra0497 27 August 2006 16:48 (AET)
The Herald has endorsed the NSW Liberal/National parties at every NSw election except the last one. That said, I think a better description than 'centre-right' or 'centre-left' is 'anti-incumbent'. Jeendan 03:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/Talk%7EThe_Sydney_Morning_Herald_4978.html"