The National

[ScotlandGer]

The thing I don't get. Labour's so quiet on it. I am not sure why.

It's just a thought tbh, but I suspect it's down to a basic contempt of the electorate, written into the system imo, among the Westminster parties' decision-makers. TTIP is relatively complex to explain, there's no longer an individual (opposition) that can be assigned blame, and it's currently an ongoing process which seems to indicate an inevitable, if compromised, outcome and so there's no short-term benefit to making it an issue of conflict. There could also be a suspicion in Labour it could open up specious, but awkward, questions as to where Labour sits being business-friendly etc. The traditional master-plan for Westminster politics is to minimise the points of contention between the Westminster parties on the belief that the majority are ignorant of politics, and so things like TTIP will always be subsumed by meaningless debates about a handful of spending commitments here and there between Tories/Labour. Somewhat reminiscent of Johann Lamont being ordered to keep quiet about the bedroom tax in Scotland, because Miliband feared it would open up an area of debate across the rest of the UK. In other words, Labour can GTF! Hopefully, Labour GTFO of Scotland!

But, I've heard it's also on the down-low in other EU countries, so I presume it's more complex than I reckon.

Yes folk aren't clowns but they're certainly being played. Not that some of them give a shit about the jobs that have gone over the past ten years - as long as they've got a newspaper to comfort them in their world view.

I don't think this is the case. It's fairly well-known what has happened to the industry in Scotland, and across the UK, in the last few decades. I doubt people will be buying this to celebrate the practices of a company or the state of the industry.

A Yes-leaning title in the traditional media may be an answer to a perceived short-coming in democratic discourse and so it is a good opportunity for the Yes message to gain a foothold in these traditional spheres of discourse. It may not work out, in which case, I hardly see that that would improve, or worsen, the current state of the industry in Scotland, in comparison as to whether it's a success. I also don't see that people are being played, as there is clearly/ potentially a gap in the marketplace, therefore ...

[Taza]

Buy at least 2 and give the spare to the biggest treacherous fannie/s Unionist/s you know.

[ForzaDundee]

First issue was a good start.

[Broccoli Dog]

It's basically just a cheap daily Sunday Herald, not as indepth though I was impressed with the international coverage. Don't usually buy a daily unless I'm stuck in a railway station for ages, so will probably pick it up from time to time, hope it continues.

[invergowrie arab]

I'm not ever going to buy a daily regulalrly but this was a decent start and I might pick it up again. Anyone who thinks it will be an snp mouthpiece has been shown to be wrong and glad to see it has steered away from parochialism and has international coverage too.

It's a good addition to the marketplace. Hope it continues.

[Le Tout P'ti FC]

Looks ok on your phone until you try to read the thing - zoom function is annoyingly sensitive, so you leap from page to page.

Printed copy is flimsy - at 50p, the i looks much better value in comparison.

Best way to read then seems to be to print the digital edition off - for 30p per copy it's certainly worth a read.

Telling that there is a big pile of Scotsman's in the shop I just visited, and an empty rack where The National was this morning.

I'd like to see this succeed, I wish it well.

[jamamafegan]

Looked in a couple of newsagents today for this but no luck. Apparently distribution is quite low. Hopefully the paper does well and becomes more readily available.

[ForzaDundee]

Looked in a couple of newsagents today for this but no luck. Apparently distribution is quite low. Hopefully the paper does well and becomes more readily available.

Print run was apparently supposed to be 50,000 all week for a trial. Apparently they are increasing to 100,000 tomorrow so I'll get a paper edition too. Good to see Sainsbury's also furiously back-peddling after initially refusing to stock it.

After the trial I'd imagine they will be able to expand output with permanent staff in place and plenty of talent in the form of pro-yes bloggers to provide freelance work.

[H_B]

Print run was apparently supposed to be 50,000 all week for a trial. Apparently they are increasing to 100,000 tomorrow so I'll get a paper edition too. Good to see Sainsbury's also furiously back-peddling after initially refusing to stock it.

After the trial I'd imagine they will be able to expand output with permanent staff in place and plenty of talent in the form of pro-yes bloggers to provide freelance work.

Yep, good to see people support the Herald stable.

Good news for the parent company.

[Tubbs]

From what I seen it looked like an Independence update with some news tagged onto it; as opposed to a newspaper with an editorial position. But if there is a market then someone will fill it.

[welshbairn]

ImageUploadedByPie & Bovril1416838310.147353.jpg

Looks ok on your phone until you try to read the thing - zoom function is annoyingly sensitive, so you leap from page to page.

Printed copy is flimsy - at 50p, the i looks much better value in comparison.

Best way to read then seems to be to print the digital edition off - for 30p per copy it's certainly worth a read.

Telling that there is a big pile of Scotsman's in the shop I just visited, and an empty rack where The National was this morning.

I'd like to see this succeed, I wish it well.

I was well impressed, if I want something to read in a cafe it'll be this rather than the "i". Pretty well sold out in Inverness by 10am, apart from WH Smith who must have got the lion's share of copies. Fk printing it yourself when it's only 50p to buy, and you pay for digital anyway! How mean can you be?

[Le Tout P'ti FC]

I was well impressed, if I want something to read in a cafe it'll be this rather than the "i". Pretty well sold out in Inverness by 10am, apart from WH Smith who must have got the lion's share of copies. Fk printing it yourself when it's only 50p to buy, and you pay for digital anyway! How mean can you be?

Erm, instead of buying it in two forms on Day 1, I could have read it online for bugger all like how most people consume newspapers these days. That would be pretty mean.

[welshbairn]

Erm, instead of buying it in two forms on Day 1, I could have read it online for bugger all like how most people consume newspapers these days. That would be pretty mean.

Fair enough..

[Dr Koop]

It's just a thought tbh, but I suspect it's down to a basic contempt of the electorate, written into the system imo, among the Westminster parties' decision-makers. TTIP is relatively complex to explain, there's no longer an individual (opposition) that can be assigned blame, and it's currently an ongoing process which seems to indicate an inevitable, if compromised, outcome and so there's no short-term benefit to making it an issue of conflict. There could also be a suspicion in Labour it could open up specious, but awkward, questions as to where Labour sits being business-friendly etc. The traditional master-plan for Westminster politics is to minimise the points of contention between the Westminster parties on the belief that the majority are ignorant of politics, and so things like TTIP will always be subsumed by meaningless debates about a handful of spending commitments here and there between Tories/Labour. Somewhat reminiscent of Johann Lamont being ordered to keep quiet about the bedroom tax in Scotland, because Miliband feared it would open up an area of debate across the rest of the UK. In other words, Labour can GTF! Hopefully, Labour GTFO of Scotland!

But, I've heard it's also on the down-low in other EU countries, so I presume it's more complex than I reckon.

I don't think this is the case. It's fairly well-known what has happened to the industry in Scotland, and across the UK, in the last few decades. I doubt people will be buying this to celebrate the practices of a company or the state of the industry.

A Yes-leaning title in the traditional media may be an answer to a perceived short-coming in democratic discourse and so it is a good opportunity for the Yes message to gain a foothold in these traditional spheres of discourse. It may not work out, in which case, I hardly see that that would improve, or worsen, the current state of the industry in Scotland, in comparison as to whether it's a success. I also don't see that people are being played, as there is clearly/ potentially a gap in the marketplace, therefore ...

Well, as someone who was employed by Newsquest for more than a decade before being kicked to the kerb, I would say the launch of the National has everything to do with making money and nothing to do with the ideals that I heard being espoused by people in the Yes movement. It's personal.

I appreciate that it takes all sorts, including those who'll happily look the other way to get their little bit of mainstream media heaven. There's no doubt that there's a shortcoming, but it - in my opinion - has been more than made up by the internet in much the same way as bloggers right and not so right managed to hand the likes of Traynor and Jackson their arses over the naked game playing at Rangers DC.

[Mr Heliums]

They always have been.

No they haven't. Compare a front cover of The Times from 1950 to one from today and the difference will be striking: a lot more news in the older paper, and a lot less stridently opinionated in both the content of the lead stories and the way they are presented. (The Daily Mail and Express are the most egregious examples of this decline). Or compare a copy of the Telegraph from 1980 with one from last week. The decline in its news reporting standards has probably been most marked among all the old broadsheets. It verges on the criminal.

But if what you're saying is that newspapers always had an editorial slant, well of course they did. But that stridency was largely kept to the leader column and there was a far more fertile and varied choice of newspaper. A hundred years ago, the town of Perth had several local papers that covered it, independently and locally owned and a choice of slants on the news. How many newspaper owners are there now, and how many remain in Scotland?

Journalism was generally far superior too. I was reading an old Perthshire Advertiser leader from the turn of the 20th century a few weeks ago and I was amazed by the depth of its argument. I don't even know if the PA bothers with a leader now.

I'd like the National to succeed because it's a good newspaper, not because it supports independence. What frustrated a lot of Yes voters with the print media was the shocking reporting of the news of the pro-Union papers, rather than the news itself.

[vikingTON]

Yep, good to see people support the Herald stable.

Good news for the parent company.

I'd be very interested to see the impact on sales of The Herald itself - paying more than twice as much (unless you're deeply interested in business news pish, hockey etc. doesn't strike me as a viable alternative.

Good to see a degree of news and a healthy international section (alongside a limited selection of sport) in the paper, but with a letters page appearing tomorrow there may actually be less of the former in days to come.

[Colkitto]

Amusing amount of seethe on Twitter over this newspaper - from fellow journos as well!

You can't beat a good bit of Unionist seethe, it's the best kind

[itzdrk]

Looked in a couple of newsagents today for this but no luck. Apparently distribution is quite low. Hopefully the paper does well and becomes more readily available.

I believe we sent out 13k copies today..........and with demand 100k tomorrow are going out

[pandarilla]

No they haven't. Compare a front cover of The Times from 1950 to one from today and the difference will be striking: a lot more news in the older paper, and a lot less stridently opinionated in both the content of the lead stories and the way they are presented. (The Daily Mail and Express are the most egregious examples of this decline). Or compare a copy of the Telegraph from 1980 with one from last week. The decline in its news reporting standards has probably been most marked among all the old broadsheets. It verges on the criminal.

But if what you're saying is that newspapers always had an editorial slant, well of course they did. But that stridency was largely kept to the leader column and there was a far more fertile and varied choice of newspaper. A hundred years ago, the town of Perth had several local papers that covered it, independently and locally owned and a choice of slants on the news. How many newspaper owners are there now, and how many remain in Scotland?

Journalism was generally far superior too. I was reading an old Perthshire Advertiser leader from the turn of the 20th century a few weeks ago and I was amazed by the depth of its argument. I don't even know if the PA bothers with a leader now.

I'd like the National to succeed because it's a good newspaper, not because it supports independence. What frustrated a lot of Yes voters with the print media was the shocking reporting of the news of the pro-Union papers, rather than the news itself.

I agree with pretty much all of that - but my point was that what constitutes 'news' has always differed (sometimes substantially) between newspapers. I think it was more than just an editorial slant as well (think of the Morning Star's content compared to the Guardian compared to the Sun - there will be very few stories (if any)covered by all three papers - and that's always been the case since they were created). The Daily Mail for example was a sensationalist rag back in the Edwardian era.

Of course the nature and appearance of newspapers has changed (far less content and much lower journalistic standards) but there was never a time when newspapers didn't follow their own agendas.

You're absolutely right in the sense of a much narrower focus to these agendas - with big media groups dictating the whole charade. Social media is filling the empty space - but there is a danger that quality journalism is in permanent decline.

[Crùbag]

Bought a copy. Not bad. Probably prefer the Herald though I haven't read most of it yet. Won't get it every day but is a good option if I happen to be in a station or shop during the week.

Funny to hear Unionists complaining about a biased newspaper!