<story><title>How the UK Security Services neutralised The Guardian</title><url>https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Angostura</author><text>As I understand it, the Guardian had previously always considered D-notice requests and had usually acquiesced. However, it decided that Snowden was so important that it took the pretty unprecedented step of ignoring them.&lt;p&gt;This made the intelligence services particularly dischuffed.&lt;p&gt;Post-Snowden the status-quo was re-established.&lt;p&gt;It remains to be seen whether the Guardian would ignore D-notices again, if something else of the magnitude of Snowden came along - I hope it would use its judgement and do so, if necessary. I&amp;#x27;m not &lt;i&gt;necessarily&lt;/i&gt; against newspapers considering requests from the intelligence service not to publish something for good reason - it can end up with people dying. It&amp;#x27;s a tough decision an editor has to make.</text></comment>
<story><title>How the UK Security Services neutralised The Guardian</title><url>https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>guiriduro</author><text>The article clearly demonstrates that The Guardian has become a shadow of its former self - pro-Establishment, anti-Assange, anti-Corbyn&amp;#x2F;Labour, all of its trustworthy intelligence reporters having left. Something of an open secret to be honest, how it now arrogates to pretend to still be &amp;quot;Left&amp;quot;-leaning but is nothing of the sort, under editorship veering from amateurish to clearly complicit.</text></comment>