Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Swedish riots: if instability can happen here, what might unfold elsewhere? (Guardian)

A stark rise in inequality has brought about unprecedented rioting in Stockholm, writes Aditya Chakrabortty. The omens for Britain are worrying.

2. Knee-jerkers are liberals in terror debate (Financial Times)

Britain has tightened security laws at many moments without becoming an unfree country, writes Janan Ganesh.

3. Globalisation isn't just about profits. It's about taxes too (Guardian)

Big corporates are gaming one nation's taxpayers against another's: we need a global deal to make them pay their way, says Joseph Stiglitz.

4. Syria: Why Iran has to be part of the solution (Independent)

The real and ugly choice is between full scale military intervention and genuine diplomacy, writes Donald Macintyre.

5. Was Woolwich a crime or an act of terror? (Times)

Some ministers see last week’s incident as part of a crusade against the west – but they are in a minority, writes Rachel Sylvester.

6. Chillax, people, and let the poor PM have a holiday (Daily Telegraph)

We need to make up our minds whether we want politicians to be more like us, or not, says Dan Hodges.

7. A jobless recovery? It can’t be ruled out yet (Independent)

Job creation in Britain is not keeping pace with the number of would-be workers, notes an Independent leader.

8. Actions not words are what matter on Syria (Financial Times)

There is no ‘western’ view on the crisis – there are deep divisions in Europe and within the US, writes Gideon Rachman.

9. My manifesto for rewilding the world (Guardian)

Nature swiftly responds when we stop trying to control it, writes George Monbiot. This is our big chance to reverse man's terrible destructive impact.

10. Iain Duncan Smith is right about spending (Daily Telegraph)

The government should spend more on defence and the police and less on welfare, argues a Telegraph leader.

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.