Talk:The Courier-Mail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Australia / Queensland (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThe Courier-Mail is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (marked as High-importance).
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for other than editorial assistance.
WikiProject Journalism  
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

The Courier Mail published an article 'Scissor Killer' around or on June/October 1980/1983? Can anyone direct me to this article which seems not to be found? ronjan@mc2.vicnet.net.au

An article THAT old will never be online for most newspapers (it is well before the internet took off), especially a News Ltd one. I suggest a library, particularly the State Library. Dankru 10:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Citation[edit]

From the last paragraph:

"It is common in government and political circles to discuss if any decision would pass the "Courier-Mail Test", meaning that if the results of the action were to go public, and all the positive aspects removed, how would any potential negative aspects be scandalised by the Courier Mail and thus what risks need to be mitigated early".

Presumably this has been referenced from somewhere; could someone provide the source? (link, page number etc.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.85.121 (talk) 10:24, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Let Me Google That For You:

http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/speaker-urges-retention-of-parly-changes/story-e6frfku9-1226740134720 http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/50098258 http://www.qirc.qld.gov.au/resources/pdf/published/2011/june/decision_td17_2010_100611.pdf http://timkastelle.org/blog/2010/06/good-failure-and-bad-failure-in-public-sector-innovation/ http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-health-boss-quits-over-payroll-bullying-20101020-16t6p.html

Sorry don't have time to add these, plus I have no idea how , )


Avaiki (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Political Position?[edit]

Found a paper which gives the "evidence" quoted but other factors argue for a left of centre position. My own understanding is that it is, for the most part, a left of centre paper - editorials and the odd columnist\blogger aside. Given the discrepancy a blanket "right wing paper" statement is not really appropriate right? 114.35.25.165 (talk) 13:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Pick up any copy of The Courier Mail. Describing it as "right of center" is absolutely correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.42.243 (talk) 05:53, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I can't speak about a range of subjects but I do know up until around the late 1990s they took a strong anti-homosexual position. - Shiftchange (talk) 06:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
To restart the discussion, the only citation we have in the article is to [1] from which the statistic of 4 out of 5 elections has the CM supporting the Coalition support is taken from the table on page 19. It should be noted that all but one newspaper was a majority Coalition supporter in those elections (showing support 3, 4 or 5 times out of 5) so the CM is by no means unusual in its support for the Coalition in that timeframe. However, if one looks at almost every other table in the source, the CM fairly consistently shows as right of the *average* of the group of newspapers as a whole, but still slightly left of centre based on absolute anonymised coding. That is, it takes a slightly left-of-centre position while the average newspaper is slightly-more-left-of-centre. Indeed, the general tenure of all the newspapers' reporting appears to be more to the left than to the right (which seems strange given the election support being more to the Coalition). I note that the report does not draw any conclusions itself about the CM; all we have is the data in the tables to make an interpretion (which might be WP:OR). I also note that this report is over 10 years old, so it is describing the CM over 10 years ago. I am wondering if that's a particularly reliable source to describe the CM today? Do we really have any evidence beyond our own POV on this issue? Should we stop describing its political position in the absence of a reliable source? Kerry (talk) 07:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)