|
Miniman - as regards the amount and nature of the ads on newspaper websites - its one of my bugbears, especially for people like myself who've already paid to subscribe to the online version of the paper.
The telegraph used to have a 'reasonable' amount of ads, which I didn't mind too much a few years ago, as they were relatively small, static (not 'flash' or similar video content) and did not slow down my PC and especially my tablet.
Since they upper the amount of content (backgrounds, lots of flash-type and video, taking up quite a bit of the screen) it has slowed down my tablet so much and even to a reasonable degree on my pc, so I (about a year or so ago) said - that's it - and now have my (Firefox) browsers on both (I tried Chrome on my tablet and still had the same issues) full of ad blockers and Ghostery to ad-based prevent tracking.
I occasionally (not so much recently) get the popup 'please turn your ad blocker off as we need the ad revenue to pay for the news content', which to me is really patronising - is they went back to the old style content, I wouldn't need them. Sad to say, though to a lesser extent, the same goes for this website, at least for the tablet - for both to work at all (its not a new tablet - a Galaxy Tab 3 8.0) the ad blockers etc have to be on.
I know what you mean about the censorship policies of the TV channels - the number of times articles appear in the newspapers and not on the BBC (normally one putting the EU, remainers, feminists/SJWs or Labour in a less than flattering light [not just comment pieces - ones backed up by facts]), even with Sky now seemingly (in my view) getting in on the act, especially on their website with 'commentary' pieces by their correspondants and editors with no reader comment areas below (as they used to and is allowed, most of time [not always - in the Telegraph - often when, funnily enough, the Chinese PM or Ambassador 'writes' an article]) and gets to say whatever their 'opinion' is on a subject with no right of reply. This from a broadcaster that issupposed to follow OFCOM's impartiality rules like ITN and others.
In a similar vein, I do find it amazing how so many TV news outlets covered by the UK's impartiality rules can 'get away' with blatant politicking and partisan/biased news reporting and especially interviews - the BBC are bad enough in my view, but Channel 4 - phew - how they get away with their obvious left wing/SJW/feminist agenda, I don't know. Only rarely does this backfire, as spectacularly was demonstrated when Ch4's Cathy Newman got soundly beaten by the ever-logical Dr. Jordan Peterson last month.
|
