Ok, so we know the Daily Mail, The Sun, The Times, The Mirror & The Guardian all have their own agenda's.

But what about the rest, what papers are trying to grind what axes, and which in your opinion, if any, is the most balanced and what draws you to that conclusion?

Guardian, Observer, Independant, or I.

I usually read the Metro sport section on my commute, and have a flick through to see if there is anything interesting. Their game and film sections are usually quite good. I couldn't believe it when Wub said they are published by the same people who write the Fail. Reading it though, it just doesn't seem like it is, you get me?

I've always enjoyed the Independent. They do well to present the facts fairly plainly without opinion but then have comment sections on each article where journalists can state their opinions. Its fairly balanced too. They had both sides of the cameras in court issue very well represented yesterday.

And do you believe each of them to give an impartial view of the current news?

I can't say that I've ever read it myself, but I have heard good things about it. However in the back of my mind I can't help but be suspicious of something which has such a blatant 'you can trust us' type name..

I mean, lets face it would you buy a used car from "Honest Al's Used Car Lot"?

The latter two, relatively.

They don't lie and demonise everything that is good though, that's why I read them. Why would I want to read a right leaning paper when all right wing ideology seems to do is fuck everything up?

Like I said though, the reports are delivered in a very dead pan sort of way. Its actually a struggle to read it sometimes as I get distracted easily. But the comment sections are ace.

The thing about news is 99% of it is boring. Thats not bad writing or a lack of interest in the subject, it just is. Especially politics and finance. Bad news papers make news exciting. They make mountains out of mole hills and focus entirely on things they can turn into 'crisis' or 'epidemics' etc etc.

The Independent does very well to deliver the facts on their own, and then allow their journalists a separate space for opinion next to it. I much prefer that way of presenting the news. It allows you to come to your own conclusions before you listen to someone else's.

I feel the same about the Guardian. I know I'm a loony lefty, so I avoid reading things that I know are deliberately designed to get me up in arms and on the march. Whats the point?

I hope that if I was an iron fisted right winger that I would feel the same way about reading the Daily Mail.

Why read something you know is going to give you a version of events that is unbalanced and specifically aimed at exciting your view point?

As opposed to a rubber fisted leftie.

Objectivity in journalism is a myth.

You're a myth.

I only bother with The Sun

I know, I know.

I just like the Sun because it's got the most celebrity gossip - if I need to know about anything else which is highly unlikely, I'll just ask my husband.

A woman who knows her place.

The Sun has the best sporting columns by a long stretch in the UK and does provide some amusement at the weekends with columnists like Frankie Boyle. It is obviously drivel in terms of the news but it's more of a comic then a paper. I don't buy any daily's but on Sunday I will get the Independent and that will keep me going every time I need a dump until the following Sunday.

Has anyone read the express, whats that like?

A less 'serious-serious' version of the Daily Mail. Although "Muslim Plot to kill Pope" was fucking jokes when those Islamic street cleaners were arrested.

I remember getting confused and buying the Daily Record once and it all being about shit that was going on in Scotland. Why the fuck do they sell a scottish newspaper in London?

What? Linkage please...

express.co.uk