Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

1. The Tories just aren't patrician enough (Guardian)

Self-conscious and lacking in confidence, the Conservative party has forgotten the redeeming virtues of the old aristocracy, writes Geoffrey Wheatcroft.

2. London has turned its back on the very people it needs most (Daily Telegraph)

A home-buying scheme to aid the 'squeezed middle’ is essential to protect the economy, argues Boris Johnson.

3. My 2020 vision for a Boris Johnson Cabinet (Times) (£)

David Cameron faces a tough party conference, but what does the longer-term future hold for the Conservatives, asks Tim Montgomerie.

4. Americans deserve a better choice than the one they've got (Guardian)

US electoral system funded by the wealthy will never distribute resources equitably, whether Barack Obama is in charge or not, says Gary Younge.

5. We are ending the something for nothing culture (Daily Mail)

It is possible to reduce the welfare budget by a further £10bn, say George Osborne and Iain Duncan Smith.

6. Conservatives in Birmingham: a nasty case of the blues (Guardian)

Since a brave speech by Theresa May in 2002, the momentum of the Tory reform project has slipped badly, says a Guardian editorial.

7. Relentless austerity will only deepen Greek woes (Financial Times)

In the absence of a very big change in policy, we should expect Spain to go down the same tube, writes Wolfgang Munchau.

8. We can profit from EU chaos (Sun)

Brussels needs Britain to help save the whole structure, not just the single currency, from collapsing in ruins, writes Trevor Kavanagh.

9. Cameron must modernise, not appease the reactionaries (Independent)

David Cameron needs to remind people who he is – a compassionate and modern conservative, says Ian Birrell.

10. Parallels between apartheid and Argentina (Financial Times)

Argentina is heading, and not for the first time, over an economic cliff, writes Tony Leon.

New Statesman
Show Hide image

Quiz: Can you identify fake news?

The furore around "fake" news shows no sign of abating. Can you spot what's real and what's not?

Hillary Clinton has spoken out today to warn about the fake news epidemic sweeping the world. Clinton went as far as to say that "lives are at risk" from fake news, the day after Pope Francis compared reading fake news to eating poop. (Side note: with real news like that, who needs the fake stuff?)

The sweeping distrust in fake news has caused some confusion, however, as many are unsure about how to actually tell the reals and the fakes apart. Short from seeing whether the logo will scratch off and asking the man from the market where he got it from, how can you really identify fake news? Take our test to see whether you have all the answers.

 

 

In all seriousness, many claim that identifying fake news is a simple matter of checking the source and disbelieving anything "too good to be true". Unfortunately, however, fake news outlets post real stories too, and real news outlets often slip up and publish the fakes. Use fact-checking websites like Snopes to really get to the bottom of a story, and always do a quick Google before you share anything. 

Amelia Tait is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman.