During World War II, the Telegraaf companies published pro-Nazi German papers, which led to a thirty-year ban on publishing after the war. The prohibition was lifted in 1949 and De Telegraaf flourished anew to become the biggest newspaper in the Netherlands. … The paper targets a broad audience, mostly in a conservative and populist style.
Two years later, on 12 September 1902, Holdert acquired the daily newspaper De Telegraaf and its subsidiary De Courant … At the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939, Holdert, by then a long-time resident of Paris, happened to be in Amsterdam for a shareholders’ meeting. Even though he the opportunity to leave, having transferred almost all of De Telegraaf’s liquid assets to the US, he decided to stay, taking up residence in the Hotel American on Leidseplein. Under Holdert’s strict directives, his newspapers adopted a strong anti-German stance at the start of the World War II, but during the German occupation from 1940 to 1945, he sought to prevent his newspapers from falling completely under German and NSB control by allowing the publication of German and pro-German periodicals. He also agreed to support the NSB financially, as long as Holdert’s company did not fall into German hands. … He was succeeded by his son Henri Holdert, who permitted the Germans to place reports in the newspaper, which cost De Telegraaf dearly after the War. On 7 April 1948 the tribunal assumed that Holdert “had not deliberately promoted Nazi propaganda, but that he had used improper means to save his company”, so it declared 2 million guilders of Holdert’s fortune, then estimated at 17.
NSB was a Dutch Nazi party. A party that the founder of the Telegraaf supported financially.
In review, De Telegraph covers the Forum for Democracy (FvD) (Dutch far-right party) leader Thierry Baudet and other figureheads favorably. … When reporting world news, De Telegraaf utilizes emotionally loaded language in their headlines, such as “Corbyn makes an excuse to Labor voters.” This story does not provide hyperlinks to outside sources. They also use loaded emotional headlines when covering immigration: “8.5 percent of those suspected of an offense were immigrants”; however, there isn’t a hyperlinked source to support this claim. … Articles about USA politics sometimes use a favorable tone for former President Trump, such as: “Donald Trump: “Well come on, impeach me!”. … In general, news reporting is poorly sourced with a strong right-leaning bias.
My fault, I should have specified it has conservative and populist bias, and thanks for the other links. I don’t think that his editorial policy 90 years ago must be seen as the current policy but, as you has shown, it seems to be far-right and fascist “friendly”. I will edit my post to correct it.
I'm going a lot off-topic here:
I don’t think that even it has a fascists bias, we should prima faze reject its content. We should be specially critical: It’s a (wo)man-made story? What questions have been done? What narrative it’s try to push? …
The only thing that I think that we could agree is that in the article the fascist question is in various points of the article, but it not seems to be the more important points that the journalist wants to communicate (it’s not in the firsts paragraphs), but the tittle gives it a special importance.
I’m not sure what is the position of each of the Europeans fascisms about the Ukraine war, then I cannot Annalise it in this case. As a curiosity: During one or two years I was infiltrated in a telegram group of a fascist Spanish organization, that organization broke up two years ago. The most important flamewars there that I read there, just before the broke up, were “Duginist”[1] fascist vs. “Atlanticist”[2] fascist related to the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Just to clarify: I was infiltrated for my antifascist militance. ACAB.
From the wikipedia article you linked:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Telegraaf
NSB was a Dutch Nazi party. A party that the founder of the Telegraaf supported financially.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hak_Holdert
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/de-telegraaf/
My fault, I should have specified it has conservative and populist bias, and thanks for the other links. I don’t think that his editorial policy 90 years ago must be seen as the current policy but, as you has shown, it seems to be far-right and fascist “friendly”. I will edit my post to correct it.
I'm going a lot off-topic here:
I don’t think that even it has a fascists bias, we should prima faze reject its content. We should be specially critical: It’s a (wo)man-made story? What questions have been done? What narrative it’s try to push? …
The only thing that I think that we could agree is that in the article the fascist question is in various points of the article, but it not seems to be the more important points that the journalist wants to communicate (it’s not in the firsts paragraphs), but the tittle gives it a special importance.
I’m not sure what is the position of each of the Europeans fascisms about the Ukraine war, then I cannot Annalise it in this case. As a curiosity: During one or two years I was infiltrated in a telegram group of a fascist Spanish organization, that organization broke up two years ago. The most important flamewars there that I read there, just before the broke up, were “Duginist”[1] fascist vs. “Atlanticist”[2] fascist related to the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Just to clarify: I was infiltrated for my antifascist militance. ACAB.
For Aleksandr Dugin fascist ideology. ↩︎
For pro State-Unitarians and pro NATO fascists. ↩︎