Personally, I get the WSJ, the Hamodia, the Mishpacha, and occasionally the Yated (for all the juicy columns).
jakyweb:
“I cannot in all conscience present such newspapers to my innocent granddaughters as if to say, no matter how much chesed you do your face is not allowed to be seen in these newspapers.”
I don’t think that’s quite the statement that not having pictures of women sends (not that I’m for it, mind you), but I guess to each their own.
PY:
“The Modia, Yated and so on, are anti-Zionist, and often make anti-Zionist statements without giving any reason to explain what is wrong with it.”
I do not believe that the Hamodia does this at all. They specifically pride themselves on their professionalism and impartiality. Please do not lump all chaerdi publications together.
“There is nothing anti-Torah in there, and the opposite, there are many inspiring parts.”
Anti-Torah? Maybe not. Anti-Chaerdi? You better believe it.
(If you’re wondering why I said “maybe not” instead of “no, it’s because of an article I once saw in the JP in which Avi Weiss and company were decrying the way people disrespect gays… after that, I put down the JP and haven’t picked one up since. Therefore, I couldn’t in good conscience write that no, there’s nothing anti-Torah there.)
And since when does having “inspiring parts” mean that there’s nothing bad as well?