Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

aoav.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 242 posts

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#191

Post by Pxtl »

JdeBP wrote: post #76

It is interesting to look at the details and see who the (news) 'media' are in this case. Going through the details, I find 1 instance (under Kemp) of the BBC, and everyone else is the 'usual suspects', the Telegraph , the Mail , GB News , the Sun , the Times , and so forth. The Guardian is only mentioned in context of exposing these conflicts of interests; and whilst I am surprised to find LBC and Nation Cymru as no…

> I am surprised to find LBC

Why? From afar my vague impression of LBC is that it's talk radio opinion slop, even if it puts in some effort to avoid the cartoonishly-far-right conservatism endemic to that genre.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#192

Post by nradov »

rigonkulous wrote: post #177
XorNot wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how you can post something this stupid after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Well, lets see .. the invasion and destruction of Iraq, the destruction of Libya, Afghanistan, Syria .. the violence in Somalia .. the genocide of Gaza, and now ethnic cleansing in Lebanon. You can say as many stupid things as you want, until the war crimes are prosecuted, the war criminals will continue to get away with war.

How do you propose to prosecute Vladimir Putin? Will the UK send some unarmed police officers to arrest him?

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#193

Post by k1m »

JdeBP wrote: post #146
k1m wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, that's a real stretch. It's apparent to anyone reading what his comment implies. And this is far from an isolated case, if you think the Guardian is an exception. We're all technical here, easy to use Google search and look up the names in the report and see how often the Guardian and the other "better" papers disclose the arms industry links. (Oh and the political party he's affiliated to isn't what's und…

No, You're the one stretching things. If you want to provide an example from The Guardian that actually works, and it is as easy to do so as you say, go ahead. As I said, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a blind spot, given who is on the staff and the byline of this very piece. But you haven't here. Rather, you've showed an article where the primary complaint of the headlined report, that the potential biases of a…

As the person suggesting that the Guardian is somehow an exception in the UK media, I think the onus should be on you to prove it. I merely pointed out that the report did not say any such thing, and gave you an example from the Guardian showing them doing exactly the same thing.

I'll give you more examples, but here's a challenge for you: Can you find examples of the named people in the Guardian where their arms industry links are clearly disclosed?

Nick Houghton

From the report:

> In an article in the Daily Mail dated 2 April 2024, Baron Houghton backed the Mail’s campaign to increase defence spending. There was no mention made of his various vested interests.

The Guardian, also with no mention of his vested interests[1]:

- "Ukraine is being asked to fight a proxy war against Russia on behalf of Nato without being given the means to win it, Nick Houghton, a former head of the armed forces, told the Lords today."

- "Houghton also called for higher spending on defence."

Nick Carter

From the report:

> "Sir Nick has been quoted across various publications re-increasing defence spending, with only reference to his military status.”

The Guardian[2]:

- "The promises to bolster the defence of the Arctic came as British former head of the armed forces General Sir Nick Carter called for greater European cooperation to deter Russia and support Ukraine."

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/oct/31/uk-pol...

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/11/ukraine-war-br...

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#194

Post by thrownthatway »

jimjohnny123 wrote: post #183
thrownthatway wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really would have expected a much more reasoned approach from the likes of you Mr coldtea. Historically I’ve found your comments informative, well thought out, and entertaining. Here’s the Wikipedia article on the BOTs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Overseas_Territories I’m willing to acknowledge those locales probably remain British territories, at least some of them, as an spect of projecting force, in add…

> Would the former British colonies be doing better or worse had they never been colonised? It's not necessarily correct to assume that they failed because they were previously colonised by the British. Should we have instead allowed other powers to colonise them? That is the only realisitic counterfactual here. Can we truly say the world would have been better off if the British had not colonised various countries,…

I tend to agree.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#196

Post by daveshistory »

cryo32 wrote: post #82
daveshistory wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sort of disagree with this. I bet if you asked liberals and progressives in a country like America for a foreign newspaper they read -- if they do read one -- in most cases it is probably the Guardian. So it may be only the best of a bad bunch but it does have that reputation.

Never thought of it from that perspective. They should read multiple sources too. BBC as well, which once the articles have settled, are quite good. (just ignore the breaking stuff which is dubious sometimes)

Well sure, of course they should. I'm just telling you how it is. All anecdotal, but in my experience, if you ask a liberal or progressive American for a foreign newspaper they sometimes read, at least four times in five, they will tell you the Guardian. They don't see that as "only getting their news from one source." They see the Guardian AS one of their "multiple sources," because at least it's "not from here."

Edited to caveat: of course, if you ask an American what foreign newspaper they read, most of the time we will say none. But if we do, it's probably the Guardian.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#197

Post by daveshistory »

JdeBP wrote: post #153
cryo32 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never thought of it from that perspective. They should read multiple sources too. BBC as well, which once the articles have settled, are quite good. (just ignore the breaking stuff which is dubious sometimes)

It's an interesting fact. I have been surprised at how often The Guardian sneaks in to stuff that is otherwise overwhelmingly North American sources only. The Legal Eagle channel on YouTube has cited The Guardian a few times that I have seen, for example. And they even present it seemingly on the assumption that they don't have to explain to their viewership what The Guardian is. They just slap it on screen the same…

Don't know if it's just my settings (spoiler: I read the Guardian) or it's by tracking IP addresses, but at least for me, when I go to the Guardian, it defaults me to a US-specific home page. I assume British people see a different page, with more coverage of their government.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#198

Post by squidbeak »

gib444 wrote: post #116
pjc50 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Telegraph, the Mail, GB News, the Sun, the Times Indeed. These are pay-to-play propaganda and should not be accorded the dignity of "newspaper". Peter Oborne's resignation from the Telegraph is still worth reading: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31510152

And The Times and The Sun aren't even British. They're owned by News Corp which is American And The Telegraph is about to become German GB News is quite likely Russian ultimately lol

GB News has emerged out of the Reform movement, which in turn is the child of UKIP. And there are good grounds to think UKIP was bankrolled in part by Russia. It's covered in part by Carol Cadwallader in the excellent "Sergei and the Westminster Spy Ring". Alexander Udod (A Russian diplomat) seemed to be the handler for senior UKIP figures.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/26/timid-incompet...

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#199

Post by daveshistory »

Pxtl wrote: post #191
JdeBP wrote: post #76

It is interesting to look at the details and see who the (news) 'media' are in this case. Going through the details, I find 1 instance (under Kemp) of the BBC, and everyone else is the 'usual suspects', the Telegraph , the Mail , GB News , the Sun , the Times , and so forth. The Guardian is only mentioned in context of exposing these conflicts of interests; and whilst I am surprised to find LBC and Nation Cymru as no…

> I am surprised to find LBC Why? From afar my vague impression of LBC is that it's talk radio opinion slop, even if it puts in some effort to avoid the cartoonishly-far-right conservatism endemic to that genre.

Not wrong, that format requires a regular parade of guests with some kind of subject matter expertise, and if it's a military or national security topic, most of those subject matter experts are inevitably from a military or at least military policy background.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#200

Post by daveshistory »

flumpcakes wrote: post #155

Surely all experts are employed in some form in their field? Should we have their entire CV read out before their expertise is given on a subject matter? Unless there is a clear conflict of interest, such as an "expert" urging a particular course of action which aligns to benefit their employers, then the audience should probably just engage their critical thinking a bit more. The majority of UK experts will probably…

You're asking that question in 2026?
Post reply on HN