Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read pieces from today's newspapers.

  1. The numbers that add up to trouble for all political parties (Observer)
    Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems must reinvent themselves as mass-membership organisations, writes Andrew Rawnsley.
  2. Ed Miliband's bid to make us pay for his party (Daily Mail)
    There is undoubtedly a hidden agenda behind Ed Miliband’s decision to try to reform the way the unions help finance Labour, writes Simon Heffer.
  3. On school meals, has Michael Gove gone all socialist? (Observer)
    The minister's faith in a food plan suggests he accepts the state has a role to play, writes Jay Rayner.
  4. Modern voters are very receptive to the Right's old economic values (Sunday Telegraph)
    Many ethnic minority populations are aspirational and hard-working. They should be natural conservative voters, writes Janet Daley.
  5. What's so wrong with marriage? (Independent on Sunday)
    Janet Street-Porter would like to see it rebranded, because children whose parents live together may suffer when relationships break down.
  6. Government reshuffle rumours bode ill for forward-looking Tories (Sunday Telegraph)
    A government that ejects a politician of David Willetts' calibre, intellect and experience to make space for (say) an Etonian with a full head of hair is practising self-harm, writes Matthew d’Ancona.
  7. Ed’s offering to give up £10m. What about you Dave? (Sunday Times)
    The old maxim had it that the Tories got into trouble over sex and Labour over money. No more, writes Adam Boulton.
  8. Bravo, Ed Miliband! But who'll pay for the election now? (Independent on Sunday)
    It takes an unusual form of political principle to say no to £9m a year, writes John Rentoul
  9. The one that didn’t get away: small fishermen net a little justice (Sunday Times)
    Charles Clover praises the High Court's ruling in favour of small-boat fishermen.
  10. Open season on black boys after a verdict like this (Guardian)
    Calls for calm after George Zimmerman was acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin are empty words for black families, writes Gary Younge.

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

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.