Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. The failure of this Islamist experiment poses a danger far beyond Egypt (Guardian)

Too many in the Muslim world will now conclude that democracy has no place for them - and be drawn to violence, writes Jonathan Freedland.

2. Scrap Tory associations, build a new party (Times)

Labour isn't the only one with local difficulties, writes Matthew Parris, grassroots Conservatives no longer represent modern Britain.

3. Unite in Falkirk - amateur and irresponsible (Guardian)

Eric Joyce, the outgoing Falkirk MP, is unimpressed by the selection process to find a successor.

4. Who will be there for you when you grow old (Times)

Janice Turner confronts the demographic and social catastrophe that will engulf the NHS.

5. Laptops and the case for high speed rail (Financial Times)

It's easier to grasp the costs than the benefits of HS2, writes Sarah O'Connor.

6. If we sell school places overseas, full blown privatisation won't be far off (Guardian)

Fiona Millar sees the ever deeper penetration of market forces as the logical extension of Michael Gove's agenda.

7. The flaws in selection are not Labour's alone (Daily Telegraph)

The Tory system kind of works. Primaries would be better, says Graeme Archer.

8. Tom Watson: my part in his downfall (Daily Telegraph)

Brisk yet thorough precis of an admired and feared Labour power-broker, by Dan Hodges.

9. Edward Snowden is a traitor just as surely as George Blake was (Daily Telegraph)

Charles Moore is unimpressed by justifications of the great CIA data-snoop leak.

10. A Conservative-Referendum party: The vindication of Sir James Goldsmith (Daily Mail)

Adrian Hilton is pleased as punch that the mood that destroyed John Major's government now sets the tone for the modern Conservative party.

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.