11/5    What left-to-center EU newspapers would the motd recommend? The
        ascendancy of the BUsh theocracy has me orienting myself towards
        the EU, whose community-oriented policies and multilateralism
        speak to my progressive/liberal values. I have reading proficiency
        in French and Spanish, and presently I'm learning Italian. My
        Tagalog & Ilokano blow chunks. Thanks. --elizp
        \_ Yeah the EU really has a spine.
           http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/11/05/eu.summit/index.html
        \_ To be honest, it's a bit sad if you only want to read stuff that
           echoes what you believe in.  The left-wing Euro papers are just as
           dogmatic, biased and repetitive as anything you'll find on the
           other side of the spectrum.  Just because it comes out of
           Europe doesn't magically make it politically more insightful.  Why
           don't you just go for a broad sampling of editorial opinion? -John
           \_ Between the NYTimes, WaPo, LATimes, and ChiTribune, I have
              a lot on my plate; I already subscribe to The Economist for
              a smart conservative perspective; and I asked for left-of-center
              b/c the EU press has a longer tradition of papers affiliated
              explicitly with political parties. ANd if I want a Libertarian
              opinion, I can just turn to my husband @ <DEAD>marginalrevolution.com<DEAD>
              --elizp
                \_ The Economist is not a 'smart conservative opinion'.  I
                \_ The Economist is not a 'smart conservative perspective'.  I
                   think you are misled.
                   \_ Understand, liberals think that's an oxymoron anyway.
                   \_ What perspective is it?
                      \_ globalist agitprop
                \_ Look, if you want to build an independent, viable,
                   intelligent view of what's happening in the world, you
                   could start by getting away from the whole "liberal/
                   conservative" black & white stuff.  The economist is
                   decidedly not what I would call "conservative" along the
                   lines of what conservatives in the US seem to call
                   "conservative".  You're also not going to get a good
                   representative sampling of the European (or any) press
                   if you don't differentiate between viewpoints in various
                   areas (economy, social issues, environment, diplomacy,
                   etc.) or even more detailed nuances there.  Start by
                   leafing through all the big name ones (no one's suggesting
                   you read the FT cover to cover) and you'll get there. -John
                   \_ OK, then help me out: what big name ones should I
                      start with? If all you wish to do at this moment is
                      berate me for my all-round myopia, rest your case:
                      my shock at the outcome of this election has already
                      unmasked it. --elizp
                      \_ OK, for the classic 'leftie' ones start with the
                         Guardian (UK) and Liberation (FR).  FAZ (DE) and
                         Times (UK) tend to be very sober in terms of
                         presentation (both optical and with their editorials)
                         The big ones in Spain are El Mundo / El Pais, and
                         in Italy one of the more widely read ones is Corriere
                         della Sera.  Also check out Le Temps in France.
                         I doubt you're interested in Dutch/Scandinavian
                         papers, but to get a fairly complete overview have
                         a look at http://www.onlinenewspapers.com .
                         To be honest, I prefer the IHT.  -John
           \_ BTW reading freerepublic and democraticunderground doesn't
              count as a broad sampling. -jrleek
        \_ Le Monde is a nyt partner.  But if you are really more interested
           in facts than fictions and lies, you should try to read a lot of
           sources (which can take some time).  The number one job of any
           journalist, whatever his political orientation is, is to lie.  But
           if you sample widely AND have a GOOD processor, you might be able to
           average the lies out and get some truth.  Keep this in mind: they
           ALL lie.
               \_ But there's bias, and there's intellectual honesty. Those
                  qualities are distinct from each other, but not always
                  easily identifiable in any range of arguments. That's
                  why I came to the motd for some recommendations, and
                  so far no one has been helpful. --elizp
                        \_ Uh... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I listed at least two papers
                           that fit your initial criterion, along with a good
                           sampling of major papers from which you can draw
                           your own confusions.  And once again, it is my view
                           that most "left of center" editors and columnists
                           here tend to be as demagogic and undifferentiated
                           as the "right of center" media that seems to annoy
                           you in the US.  Intellectually honest, maybe, but
                           definitely sanctimonious.  I will gladly let you
                           know when I find one that isn't so holier than thou
                           as to be really really tiresome.  -John
           \_ but anonymous cowards on the MOTD always tell the truth.  -tom
              \_ That's uncalled for.
                 \_ Not necessarily.  The AC just slagged off all journos
                    with his needlessly nasty review.  Tom responded in kind.
                    Status quo preserved. --erikred (nice try, AMC)
                    \_ Tom is unable to respond in any other way.  It's
                       misleading to say a constant function is responding to
                       anything, it just sort of stays constant.
                       \_ hey, it's NERFAMC!  -tom
        \_ The Guardian is pretty good and in English:
           http://www.guardian.co.uk
           Right after 9/11, when the entire American media turned itself
           into a cheering section for Bush, I read it for an alternative
           perspective. Now I can find that in the American media, so
           my reading of it has dropped off quite a bit. -ausman
        \_ try the Al Jazeera. Halaalalalahahahalala.