Difference between revisions of "Nuclear rebuild: How the Different Newspapers Stack Up"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
* For | * For | ||
| − | + | ''The Times'' - Argues that "nuclear energy is necessary to bridge Britain’s energy gap" [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,542-2006520,00.html] | |
* Against | * Against | ||
| − | + | ''The Independent'' - Argues that the "wrong decision has laready been made". The paper argues that the government's threee month consultation "is simply the final stage of a public relations exercise designed to prepare the ground for a Prime Ministerial volte face on nuclear energy. It is a classic New Labour spin operation". [http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article340591.ece] | |
Revision as of 10:21, 24 January 2006
- For
The Times - Argues that "nuclear energy is necessary to bridge Britain’s energy gap" [1]
- Against
The Independent - Argues that the "wrong decision has laready been made". The paper argues that the government's threee month consultation "is simply the final stage of a public relations exercise designed to prepare the ground for a Prime Ministerial volte face on nuclear energy. It is a classic New Labour spin operation". [2]
