As editor, I think we need to act more decisively on what kind of material appears on the 'Guardian'. Those who argue that this is an affront to freedom of speech miss the point. That freedom counts for little if it is used to silence others.
After working at the 'Guardian' for two decades, I feel I know instinctively why it exists. Most of our journalists and our readers do, too - it's something to do with holding power to account and upholding liberal values.
Facebook has become the richest and most powerful publisher in history by replacing editors with algorithms - shattering the public square into millions of personalised news feeds, shifting entire societies away from the open terrain of genuine debate and argument while they make billions from our valued attention.
At a moment when people are losing faith in their ability to participate in politics and make themselves heard, the media can play a critical role in reversing that sense of alienation.
The 'Guardian''s unique ownership structure safeguards our editorial independence from commercial or political interference and means we can reinvest any money we receive into this journalism that matters so much.
For young people in the U.K. who find themselves without anywhere to live - perhaps they have left the family home after a relationship breakdown, or to escape abuse, or have left care - it is far too easy to become trapped in a chain of misfortune, with little help from the state.
