Talk:New Idea

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Australia

	Australia portal New Idea 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Media watch

I've reverted the claim that Media Watch described New Idea as garbage journalism. The line read:

"New Idea was criticised on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Media Watch for the use of sensationalist headlines and content and was described as 'garbage journalism'."

The problem is that Media Watch certainly heavily criticised New Idea, but that specific quote was in regard to rival Woman's Day. From the transcipt:

" ... like this story in rival mag Woman’s Day that another viewer complained about: ... Well, we’d have to agree with the ABC’s Ian Mannix, who emailed us from a laundromat where he’d picked up the mag to say 'This is garbage journalism.'"

Mannix's quote, (which Media Watch agreed with) was specifically in regard to Woman's Day. Personally, I can see why someone might want to apply the tag to both, but in regard to attribution it was only applied to one of the two magazines. Both, however, came in for a great deal of criticism - it is just that this particular piece of criticism targeted New Idea's rival. - Bilby (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on New Idea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]