The popular Kantipur has become Gorkhapatra of political parties these days. Most of its news are false, biased, one-sided and unethical. I don't see any differences between Gorkhapatra and Kantipur.

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH U KANTIPUR HAS BECOME VERY BIASED

i agree too.

it used to be one fine newspaper...... alas....!

runche haru.

Kantipur is Gorkhapatra of people.It's our fortune to have a newspaper like Kantipur.

there is no difference between kantipur and gorkhapatra.

other media are more neutral and give neutral view.

Kantipur always speaks in favor of public interest. These days, it is writing in favor of ongoing democratic movement. This doesn't necessarily mean that it is biased to political parties. Do not forget that it used to be in frontline to speak against Girija when it had to. Democracy is entirely a different topic than seven political parties. It is a system and every people in the world needs this regardless of existence of those parties.

If you are really looking for a neutral paper, go and read 'Nispakshya Saptahik' of Ram Prasad Khanal.

We don't need any neutral newspapers this time....This is not time to be neutral....By the way, can you name some neutral newspapers these days?

ya !
its propaganda for rayalists.We should be proud,we have news paper like Kantipur.Kantipur is brought us the real fac-.the crual attrocities of autocrates.Kandipur deserve a good credit for voicing for poor Nepali people.

.people use the word unethical a lot. i don't see why it is relevant in kantipur's case. newspapers, like individuals, can have different political inclinations - which is reflected most commonly in their opinion pieces. it is not necessary to be "neutral" to be a great newspaper. on the other hand, forced neutrality tends to distort the picture as much as a biased view.

if you look at american tv channels (oh yes, cnn included, not just the perennial favorite fox), you would believe that the resistance to the war in iraq is virtually matched by the fervor for it - a perception deliberately fostered to maintain this image of "fair and balanced" (or whatever the catchphrase might be). any opinion poll will tell you that is not the case, that the two views have exchanged dominance over the other, and that lately the war is quite unpopular - but you wouldn't know that by watching the "balanced" cnn. it has, on many occasions, become a joke in its efforts to include as many viewpoints as they can find - to the point of making the issue itself intractable - and selling itself for just the debate, nothing more. that is a sham, not journalism. responsible, ethical journalism comes as much from the heart as the head - and we all know when the heart's involved it's quite difficult not to be inclined towards one perspective more than the others.

the new york times is a biased paper. yet it is one the most popular newspaper in the world, and an example to many. of course, at present, a lot of people can't stand it and think it caters to left-wing nut-jobs. and of course, it is inclined to the left more than the right - except for the token op-ed columnist, virtually all others participate unabashedly in bush-bashing and bush-whacking almost everyday. but is it an unethical newspaper for that reason? i don't think so. and going by the subscription and circulation numbers, i am not alone.

as long as facts are not twisted - and the photoshop accusations on kantipur in this forum have been amply debunked - the interpretation and mere highlighting of certain viewpoints does not make a newspaper unethical. more inclined to a certain perspective perhaps, but that's for the reader to judge and accordingly take the opinions (and everything else, for that matter) in the newspaper with a grain of salt.

besides, whether an opinion is biased or not depends on your own take on things, no?

(and for a change, can someone please call gorarawaapatra unethical? my dad's paying for it with his tax money and it praises this fat dude incharge of firing at his neighbors!)

Isnt kantipur the newspaper which published inflammatory news against the himalayan times by showing its news about buddha. the reason was simple, kantipur's english version the kathmandu post was losing battle with himalayan times.

And guess what , the news kantipur published to stir public anger what itself published in kantipur a year prior to the date of publish in himalayan times. what a hyprocrite.

Sorry to say kantipur is not a neutral newspaper and has manipulate news many times for its own benifit

Kantipur is indeed biased, but has made a fortune out of it...So, I guess as long as it helps their bottomline, why won't they be biased?????

guru haru .........andolan bhairaheko chha........sarkar gorkhapatra through marne gari propagada fijauchha.....anni hamro patrika kina media senser bhanera darayebash ..................... proaganda is very very essetial in andolan ......... kantipur rocks.......hunna ta sale dhoti le own garchha.............tara current situation ma it rocks

Dear all, the ongoing demonstrations are purely political. Any good newspaper can't take side of any political parties, groups or individuals. Actually, Kantipur is no more a newspaper, its a viewspaper, ie it gives views of its journalists, employees and managers on ongoing political demonstrations.

to make a happy these F, royalists,, Kantipur should include one page just for Royal families and their relatives.

T-Mobile,
Suggesting a view-point from a neutral point should not be considered Royalist.....unless u consider everything against your views is a Royalist view..........No one said anything about Nepal Samarcharpatra....I personally like reading Nepal Samacharpatra...they are fair....and report what they see.....Now, some people might not like Nepal Samacharpatra.....that does not make me one or the another.....If we think Kantipur is biased....why do u have a problem with that???

Dear Tmobile, its not about supporting or not supporting the king, its about fairness, professional ethics and quality of the newspaper.