Does it represent the people?
In Britain we have the Sun. Most people turn directly to page 3.
But it also has quality editorial content:
LOOPY
Who wouldn’t want to turn to page for a quick peek?
I have never been to England or read the Sun but I vote it “Best Newspaper in the World”. 
England must be a great place!
I agree. Probably the highest circulation US paper is USAToday ( 
), which would explain why most americans voted for W, supported the invasion of Iraq and can’t locate Taiwan on a map.
I’m shocked to discover the Australian paper with the biggest weekday circulation is the Melbourne Herald-Sun.
The best selling in total is the Sydney Sunday Telegraph. Neither would be my paper of choice, but it probably doesn’t do a bad job of representing the people. I’m old enough to remember the page 3 girls in the Sydney papers, who have since disappeared 
Wow!
Herald Sun . . . but not just any, the Melbourne one. I guess the parochial element plays a big hand in all that. I would have said the Sydney Morning Herald, but then that was my local.
As for the old evening papers in Sydney and Melbourne. What a pity they’ve gone. Awfully poor imitations of the English tabloids but the turnaround on the late editions was amazing. You could quite literally grab an evening edition telling you the scores of the football match you’d just seen on your way home!
Then there was Truth! Last time I read that it had an article on a former PM who was found dead in a motel room in Five Dock. Sgt such and such was quoted as saying “Looks like he died on the job. He had a condom on and boy was it loaded”.
Respeck!
HG
Number One in Canada: The Toronto Star, with a weekly circulation of over 3 million. (According to this website listing the circualtion of all Canadian newspapers)
Number Two is The Globe & Mail, with a weekly circulation of under 2 million.
That’s my paper of choice too, but seriously, there’s no way it could ever outsell even the Terror, paper of the masses. Since when does quality have anything to do with circulation? You elitist, liberal snob, you 
BWAHAHAHA! And you think you’re elite because you voted against Bush, supported Saddam Hussein and live in a concrete shoebox in Taiwan??? 
I seriously doubt many Americans would trade places with you. Feels nice to be so “clever and classless and free”, doesn’t it?
[quote=“Maoman”]Number One in Canada: The Toronto Star, with a weekly circulation of over 3 million. (According to this website listing the circualtion of all Canadian newspapers)
Number Two is The Globe & Mail, with a weekly circulation of under 2 million.
[/quote]
Yes, and when you join both papers you have to tow the party line - the Liberal Party line. It is why I have been expat for all of my working life. Given the choice of working for smug eastern idiots with University of Toronto degrees, or working for western rednecks, I’ll choose never to pay a dime of Canadian taxes. Both papers are piss-weak. Thorsell, John R. Saul, Jeffrey Simpson etc., I doubt if these Liberal party hacks could ever find a job outside of statist Canada. They have been reading and believing their shit for so long, their age wrinkles are brown. Moreover, they are typical of most Canadians. As Trudeau said, most politicians and journalists are nobodies outside of Ottawa. That pretty much sums up our whole country, don’t you think? I have an even lower regard for the Toronto Star. Nobody reads this paper in the West. It should be called the
[quote=“daasgrrl”]I’m shocked to discover the Australian paper with the biggest weekday circulation is the Melbourne Herald-Sun.
The best selling in total is the Sydney Sunday Telegraph. Neither would be my paper of choice, but it probably doesn’t do a bad job of representing the people. I’m old enough to remember the page 3 girls in the Sydney papers, who have since disappeared [/quote]
i though the english tabloids were bad, but blimey the sydney daily telegraph is a real piece of work. some of the xenophobic crap they wrote about english people during the rugby world cup was unbelieveable. funny thing is it completely backfired on them, as the england team used it as a major motivator, and we all know who are the world champions now.
sydney morning herald is a better paper, but still has it’s moments. overall i think the aussie papers do their public a major disservice.
In what respect, exactly? I mean, to my way of thinking a paper ‘serves’ the public by giving it what it wants. And it seems most people, based on the answers so far, want tabloids, which tend to be parochial. The true ‘quality paper’ in Australia is The Australian, with the small problem that it’s so dull no-one reads it. So? Are things so much better wherever you come from?
In what respect, exactly? I mean, to my way of thinking a paper ‘serves’ the public by giving it what it wants. And it seems most people, based on the answers so far, want tabloids, which tend to be parochial. The true ‘quality paper’ in Australia is The Australian, with the small problem that it’s so dull no-one reads it. So? Are things so much better wherever you come from?[/quote]
so, by your way of thinking, if aussie papers are giving their readers what they want, then all sydney dwellers must be raving xenophobes. i thought that only applied to queenslanders!
the vast majority of australians i spoke to while i was in sydney for the world cup disapproved of what the telegraph was doing, and like i said their xenophobic rantings didn’t destabilise the england team as they hoped. that’s why i think the telegraph did the austraian people a disservice.
and no they’re not much better where i’m from - i already said that english tabloids are bad - but imagine the reaction if a english paper wrote the same crap about pakistanis or bangladeshis.
OK - you’re speaking specifically about the England issue. Hmmm - I wouldn’t say ‘raving xenophobes’, but Australia is more racist than it used to be. But I think this specific instance is due to the ‘rivalry’ mentality which Australians usually reserve for England and New Zealand, which is part good-natured and part deadly serious
I would not put it on a par with an English paper writing disparaging things about Pakistanis or Bangladeshis because I think that puts a lot of racial, cultural, immigration etc. elements into the mix. In comparison I think Australians see the English and Kiwis as ‘the same, but different’ and hence fair game for abuse. I would put it on a par with the English press rubbishing the Australians, which on the whole wouldn’t bother me. I mean, it’s not nice, and you might argue it’s not fair either, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it happened the same way under reversed circumstances. Mind you, I did not follow the rugby, so I don’t know the specific things that were said - there’s not much that I can think of that we could really use against the British - our cultures are really not all that different, and IMO, that’s the actual basis for the rivalry.
I am from Kenya and new in Taipei. My country’s main newspapers are:
Kenya Times (pro-Govt daily0
Nation (independent daily)
East African Standard (weekly business newspaper).
Journalism quality of these is mostly OK, but nothing like major dailies in Europe or Nth America.
“most americans voted for w”? really? are you sure about that? what is your source? your assertation is the first i 've heard that bush won the popular election.
I agree! 
It doesn’t surprise me that the Melbourne Herald Sun is the most popular in Australia. The crossword isn’t cryptic and it’s actually quite amusing! But if I want real news, mingled with some fun, I would read The Age. [/i]