My Brief Flirtation with the Right

A Centrist Dad Reads The Spectator: Notes From a Trial Subscription

I’m halfway through a trial subscription to The Spectator. This post is a kind of review or maybe more of a personal field report. The decision to subscribe wasn’t random I’d been hearing about it for years, and I’d also been listening to their podcast, Coffee House Shots, which I’ve enjoyed, even when I don’t always agree with it. I signed up out of curiosity rather than loyalty. It has a reputation punchy, provocative, “the house journal of the Tory party” as some put it and I wanted to understand it from the inside. I don’t hate-read. I genuinely wanted to give it a fair go.

This isn’t the first time I’ve stepped outside my media comfort zone I wrote about that in a previous post on the 'comfortable middle'. Since then, I’ve dabbled across the spectrum: The Times, UnHerd, Novara, and now The Spectator. Each one offers a different kind of discomfort or perspective, depending on the day.

The Curse of the Comfortably Middle

So far? I’m minded not to continue beyond the trial, but I haven’t slammed the door. It’s been an interesting window into a certain worldview, and, unexpectedly, a front-row seat to a changing of the guard. The magazine was recently bought by hedge fund billionaire Sir Paul Marshall, a man best known for backing UnHerd and GB News. The long-time editor

Fraser Nelson

has stepped down (I’ll admit I was relieved when he turned up at The Times instead), and in a twist which maybe some could have guessed (albeit not me), former Cabinet minister, and now Lord, Michael Gove has taken his place. It’s hard not to read the magazine now without wondering whether you’re witnessing a slow shift in tone, or the start of something more dramatic.

Clever, Clubby, Not Quite Me

Let’s start with the good. The writing is excellent fluent, confident, and often very funny. There’s a wide range of contributors and content, and while the politics dominates, there’s also plenty on art, culture, travel, books, and more. I’ve particularly enjoyed the specialist features and reviews often with a distinctively conservative slant, but written with style and substance. A few pieces have genuinely held my attention from start to finish, which is more than I can say for most newspapers. The recently piece on the The conservatism of Thomas the Tank Engine, made me smile and think.

But even when I’ve enjoyed it, I’ve rarely felt like the intended reader. There’s a clubbiness to the tone, a sense that you’re listening in on a conversation among old friends who already agree about most things. A knowingness. Occasionally it’s charming, but mostly it makes you feel like a guest at someone else’s golf club.

Critics have described The Spectator as the Conservatives’ parish magazine, and that’s about right. Its audience isn’t mass-market. It's party donors, Westminster insiders, opinion columnists. That’s not a problem in itself. But if you’re trying to read outside your bubble, it helps if the bubble you're peering into occasionally acknowledges you exist.

Writers vs. Readers

The biggest surprise, and not a pleasant one, has been the comments. While the articles are often nuanced or ironic, the readers below the line are fuming. It’s not universal, but it’s hard to ignore the tone: bitter, aggressive, and especially fixated on immigration and woke!

I’m not blind to the fact that immigration is a significant issue for many people, and I don’t think it should be off-limits in political discussion. But the sheer frequency and fury of the comments feels unhealthy, like the needle’s stuck. It turns what might be a thoughtful piece on housing or public services into another excuse to rage against migrants, “elites,” or Sadiq Khan. I came looking for a window into the conservative mind; what I often found was a vent.

This disconnect between the magazine’s carefully calibrated voice and the rage of its readers has been noted by others too. One writer described it as a place where “enclaves of moderation and thoughtfulness” survive in a “fraternity house pummelling Muslims and high-fiving on Brexit”. That’s perhaps unfair to the writers, some of whom clearly put in the work to provoke rather than inflame, but it does capture the atmosphere of the comment sections pretty well.

The Vibe: Everything Is Broken

There’s a broader mood that runs through the magazine, and it’s one of decline. Not just cultural decline, but institutional, moral, even architectural. Parliament is broken. The BBC is broken. Cities are broken. Humour is broken. Britain itself may or may not be salvageable, depending on the columnist.

This sort of gloom can be seductive (its interesting it comes up a lot in Novara Media as well), especially if you’re middle-aged and nostalgic for a time when the bins got emptied, the trains ran on time, and you still knew how your remote worked. But after a while, it starts to feel like a pose. There’s an air of performative collapse, as if simply noticing how terrible everything is confers some kind of moral clarity.

Academics and journalists have flagged this tone too, suggesting that under its new owner, the magazine might lean further into this worldview. Paul Marshall’s other media ventures, including GB News, thrive on cultural pessimism. So far, The Spectator hasn’t gone full froth, but you can feel the gravity pulling. It’s a magazine that knows what its audience fears, and knows how to stoke it.

The Sale and the New Guard

This isn’t just speculation. In September 2024, The Spectator was sold to Old Queen Street Ventures, a company owned by Marshall. The previous chairman, Andrew Neil, resigned immediately, expressing concern about editorial independence. Nelson followed soon after.

Marshall insists the magazine will remain editorially independent, with separate structures from his other holdings. But critics point out that you don’t spend £100 million on a niche weekly magazine unless you have a mission. As The Guardian noted, Marshall seems to be building something: a media ecosystem for the right. Whether The Spectator retains its sceptical, clubbable voice, or becomes part of a more combative campaign, remains to be seen.

I didn’t expect my little trial subscription to land me in the middle of a live case study in British media ownership, and to be honest I am not qualified to comment much more. But maybe it’s been an interesting time to do a trial.

So, Will I Stick With It and Would I Recommend It?

Probably not. I’ll keep reading until the trial ends – partly out of curiosity, partly to see how the Gove era unfolds – but it doesn’t feel like home, which might be good thing in a way. I don’t mind reading things I disagree with; I think that’s healthy. And in truth, I’ve been enjoying the broader habit of reading more widely, even when I find myself raising an eyebrow or muttering at the screen. It's become part of how I make sense of the moment we're in.

Still, The Spectator itself doesn’t quite sit right. The tone – especially among its commentariat – feels too sour, too certain, too locked into a narrative of decline. And I can’t help but wonder whether Paul Marshall sees UnHerd as the more open, exploratory arm of his media portfolio, and The Spectator as the comfort zone for his fellow conservatives, perhaps with a nudge further to the right.

Would I recommend it? That depends. If you’re a conservative or some other flavour of right-wing, then yes although let’s be honest, you probably already read it and don’t need a lecture from me (a slightly confused centrist who hasn’t had a lot of sleep in five years and should concentrate on his real job!). For centrists like myself, maybe. There’s good writing and some interesting cultural coverage, but you may find the same sticking points I did. As for anyone fully committed to socialism, I can only imagine subscribing as a form of opposition research and even then, there are probably better uses of your time.

So what next for me? Maybe the London Review of Books, though I’ve never made it through a whole article. There’s a first time for everything. More realistically, I’m tempted by The Economist sometimes, frustrating, but sharp, globally minded, and not overly tribal. Alistair Campbell keeps pushing The New European, but to be honest, part of the whole process was to get away from the easy listening of The Rest is Politics.

In the meantime, I’d love recommendations. What do you read to challenge or comfort your worldview?