I missed this self-congratulatory passage, two weeks ago, on the Guardian's 190th anniversary:
The paper has essentially changed neither its ownership nor its character during its long life. Taylor's eager embrace of political reform in 1832; Scott's early advocacy of Irish home rule and opposition to the Boer war; the attempt to warn the world of the threat posed by Hitler; the immediate realisation in 1956 that Suez was a catastrophe; the pursuit of sleazy politicians in the 1990s; the partnership with WikiLeaks to draw back the curtain from the murky world of international diplomacy; and the commitment to opening up journalism in the digital age; they are all much of a piece.
I don't know enough about the Guardian's history to know how 'of a piece' the record would look if you factored in the paper's recent willingness to give space to people either justifying or setting out an apologia for terrorist murder; or its provision of space for the dramatic presentation of old anti-Semitic tropes. But I think this might be an issue of interest for historians of journalism without any stake in the 'of a piece' story. (Thanks: RB.)