text:
Sword Beach

Sword, commonly known as Sword Beach, was the code name given to one of the five main landing areas along the Normandy coast during the initial assault phase, Operation Neptune, of Operation Overlord. The Allied invasion of German-occupied France commenced on 6 June 1944. Stretching 8 km from Ouistreham to Saint-Aubin-sur-Mer, the beach proved to be the easternmost landing site of the invasion after the abortion of an attack on a sixth beach, code-named Band. Taking Sword was to be the responsibility of the British Army with sea transport, mine sweeping and a naval bombardment force provided by the British Royal Navy as well as elements from the Polish, Norwegian and other Allied navies.

Among the five beaches of the operation, Sword is the nearest to Caen, about 15 km from the goal of the 3rd Infantry Division. The landings were achieved with low Allied casualties but the advance from the beach was slowed by traffic congestion and resistance in defended areas behind the beach. Further progress towards Caen was halted by the only armoured counter-attack of the day, mounted by the 21st Panzer Division.

Background
Following the Fall of France, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill vowed to return to continental Europe and liberate the Nazi German-occupied nations. The Western Allies agreed to open a Second Front in northern Europe in 1942 to aid the Soviet Union. However, with resources for an invasion lacking, it was postponed but planning was undertaken that in the event of the German position in western Europe becoming critically weakened or the Soviet Union's situation becoming dire, forces could be landed in France; Operation Sledgehammer. At the same time, planning was underway for a major landing in occupied France during 1943; Operation Roundup. In August 1942, Canadian and British forces attempted an abortive landing—Operation Jubilee—at the Calais port-town of Dieppe; the landing was designed to test the feasibility of a cross-channel invasion. The attack was poorly planned and ended in disaster; 4,963 soldiers were killed, wounded or captured. The decision to prosecute the Battle of the Atlantic to its closure, the lack of landing craft, invading Sicily in July 1943, and Italy in September following the defeat of Axis forces in North Africa in May 1943 resulted in the postponement of any assault on northern Europe till 1944.

Having succeeded in opening up an offensive front in southern Europe, gaining valuable experience in amphibious assaults and inland fighting, Allied planners returned to the plans to invade Northern France. Now scheduled for 5 June 1944, the beaches of Normandy were selected as landing sites, with a zone of operations extending from the Cotentin Peninsula to Caen. Operation Overlord called for the British Second Army to assault between the River Orne and Port en Bessin, capture the German-occupied city of Caen and form a front line from Caumont-l'Éventé to the south-east of Caen, in order to acquire airfields and protect the left flank of the United States First Army while it captured Cherbourg. Possession of Caen and its surroundings would give Second Army a suitable staging area for a push south to capture the city of Falaise, which could then be used as a pivot for an advance on Argentan, the Touques River and then towards the Seine River. Overlord would constitute the largest amphibious operation in military history. After delays, due to both logistical difficulties and poor weather, the D-Day of Overlord was moved to 6 June 1944. Eisenhower and Bernard Montgomery, commander of 21st Army Group, aimed to capture Caen within the first day, and liberate Paris within 90 days.

Allied
The coastline of Normandy was divided into seventeen sectors, with codenames using a spelling alphabet—from Able, west of Omaha, to Roger on the east flank of Sword. Eight further sectors were added when the invasion was extended to include Utah on the Cotentin Peninsula. Sectors were further subdivided into beaches identified by the colours Green, Red, and White.

The Anglo-Canadian assault landings on D-Day were to be carried out by the British Second Army, under Lieutenant General Miles Dempsey. The Second Army's I Corps, commanded by Lieutenant General John Crocker, was assigned to take Sword. To Major General Tom Rennie's 3rd Infantry Division fell the task of assaulting the beaches and seizing the main British objective on D-Day, the historic Norman city of Caen. Attached to the 3rd Infantry Division for the assault were the 27th Independent Armoured Brigade, the 1st Special Service Brigade (which also contained Free French Commandos), No. 41 (Royal Marine) Commando of the 4th Special Service Brigade, Royal Marine armoured support, additional artillery and engineers, and elements of the 79th Armoured Division. 6th Beach Group was deployed to assist the troops and landing craft landing on Sword and to develop the beach maintenance area.

The 3rd Infantry Division was ordered to advance on Caen, 7.5 mi from Sword, with the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division advancing on its western flank to secure Carpiquet airfield, 11 mi from Juno Beach, on the outskirts of the city. The 3rd Infantry was also ordered to relieve the elements of the 6th Airborne Division that had secured the bridges over the River Orne and Caen Canal during Operation Tonga, secure the high ground north of Caen, and "if possible Caen itself". The last point was further reinforced when I Corps' commander, General Crocker, instructed the division, prior to the invasion, that by nightfall the city must be either captured or "effectively masked" with troops based north-west of the city and Bénouville.

Sword stretched about 5 mi from Saint-Aubin-sur-Mer in the west to the mouth of the River Orne in the east. It was further sub-divided into four landing sectors; from west to east these sectors were 'Oboe' (from Saint-Aubin-sur-Mer to Luc-sur-Mer), 'Peter' (from Luc-sur-Mer to Lion-sur-Mer), 'Queen' (from Lion-sur-Mer to La Brèche d'Hermanville), and finally 'Roger' (from La Brèche d'Hermanville to Ouistreham). Each sector was also divided into multiple beaches. The sector chosen for the assault was the 1.8 mi wide 'White' and 'Red' beaches of 'Queen' sector, as shallow reefs blocked access to the other sectors. Two infantry battalions supported by DD tanks would lead the assault followed up by the commandos and the rest of the division; the landing was due to start at 07:25 hours.

German

On 23 March 1942, Führer Directive Number 40 called for the official creation of the Atlantic Wall—a line of concrete gun emplacements, machine-gun nests, minefields and beach obstacles stretching along the French coast. Fortifications were initially concentrated around ports, but were extended into other areas beginning in late 1943. While the German Army had seen its strength and morale heavily depleted by campaigns in Russia, North Africa and Italy, it remained a powerful fighting force. Most of the German divisions along the French coast in late 1943, however, were either formations of new recruits or battered veteran units still resting and rebuilding after service on the Eastern Front; altogether some 856,000 soldiers were stationed in France, predominantly along the Channel coast. They were supported by an additional 60,000 Hilfswillige (Russian and Polish conscripts to the German army).

Under the command of Field Marshals Erwin Rommel and Gerd von Rundstedt, the defences of the Atlantic Wall were heavily upgraded; in the first six months of 1944, 1.2 million tons of steel and 17.3 million cubic yards of concrete were laid. The coast of northern France was also studded with four million antitank and anti-personnel mines, and 500,000 beach obstacles.

On and behind Sword, twenty strongpoints, including several artillery batteries, were constructed. The coastline was littered with wooden stakes, mines, hedgehogs, and Dragon's teeth, while along the top of the beach, the Germans had constructed a network of trenches, gun pits, mortar pits, and machine gun nests. Barbed wire surrounded these positions and lined the beach. The beachfront itself, being generally flat and exposed, was guarded by a few scattered bunkers, with machine gun and sniper posts in some of the holiday homes and tourist facilities lining the shore. To reinforce the defences, six strongpoints had been constructed, each with at least eight 5 cm Pak 38 50 mm anti-tank guns, four 75 mm guns, and one 88 mm gun. One of the strongpoints (codenamed Cod by the British), faced directly on to Queen sector. Exits from the beaches had been blocked with various obstacles, and behind the beaches, six artillery batteries had been positioned, three of which were based within three strongpoints; these latter batteries had four 100 mm guns and up to ten 155mm guns. In addition, positioned east of the River Orne was the Merville Gun Battery, containing four Czechoslovakian 100 mm howitzers which were within range of Sword and the invasion fleet. Between Cherbourg and the River Seine there were a total of 32 batteries capable of firing on to the five invasion beaches; half of them were positioned in casemates of 6 ft reinforced concrete.

Since the spring of 1942, Generalleutnant Wilhelm Richter's 8,000-man strong 716th Infantry Division had been positioned to defend the Calvados coast of Normandy. In March 1942, the 352nd Infantry Division assumed control of the western Calvados coast, leaving the 716th in position north of Caen covering an 8-mile (13 km) stretch of coastline. The division comprised four regular infantry battalions, two Ost battalions, and artillery units. Four infantry companies were spread along Sword, with two positioned facing Queen sector—another four were positioned inland behind the beach. Further inland, Generalleutnant's Edgar Feuchtinger's 16,297 strong 21st Panzer Division had been positioned on both sides of the River Orne around Caen to provide an immediate counter-attack force should a landing take place. In May 1944, two Panzergrenadier battalions and an antitank battalion from the 21st Panzer Division were placed under Richter's command; this deployment eliminated 21st Panzer as a mobile reserve. One of these battalions, along with the division's anti-tank guns and several mobile 155 mm guns, was positioned on Périers Ridge, which rose to about 50 m above sea level, 3 mi south of Sword.

3rd Division group
3rd Division – Major-General T. G. Rennie

8th Brigade (assault brigade) 9th Brigade 185th Brigade Divisional Troops
 * 1st Battalion Suffolk Regiment
 * 2nd Battalion East Yorkshire Regiment
 * 1st Battalion South Lancashire Regiment
 * 2nd Battalion Lincolnshire Regiment
 * 1st Battalion King's Own Scottish Borderers
 * 2nd Battalion Royal Ulster Rifles
 * 2nd Battalion Royal Warwickshire Regiment
 * 1st Battalion Royal Norfolk Regiment
 * 2nd Battalion King's Own Shropshire Light Infantry
 * 3rd Reconnaissance Regiment Royal Armoured Corps
 * HQ Royal Artillery (RA) 3rd Division
 * 33rd and 76th Field Regiments, RA (self-propelled guns)
 * 7th Field Regiment, RA
 * 20th Anti-Tank Regiment, RA
 * 92nd (Loyals) Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment, RA
 * 3rd Divisional Royal Engineers (RE) – CRE: Lieutenant Colonel R.W. Urquhart
 * 17th Field Company, RE
 * 245th Field Company, RE
 * 253rd Field Company, RE
 * 15th Field Park Company, RE
 * 3rd Divisional Signals, Royal Corps of Signals
 * 2nd Battalion Middlesex Regiment (machine guns)

Attached units and formations

27th Armoured Brigade 5th Assault Regiment, RE 1st Special Service Brigade (landed on eastern extremity of Sword) – Brigadier Lord Lovat 4th Special Service Brigade (landed between Juno and Sword)
 * 13th/18th Royal Hussars (DD tanks)
 * 1st East Riding Yeomanry
 * Staffordshire Yeomanry
 * 77 & 79 Assault Squadrons, RE (AVREs)
 * 629 Field Squadron, RE
 * 71 Field Company, RE
 * 263rd (Sussex) Field Company, RE (attached from XII Corps Troops, Royal Engineers as beach obstacle clearance parties)
 * No. 3 Commando – Lieutenant Colonel Peter Young
 * No. 4 Commando – Lieutenant Colonel Robert Dawson
 * A force of 176 French Marine Commandos from No. 10 (Inter-Allied) Commando, commanded by Commandant Philippe Kieffer landed with No. 4 Commando
 * No. 6 Commando – Lieutenant Colonel Derek Mills-Roberts
 * No. 45 (Royal Marine) Commando – Lieutenant Colonel Charles Ries

101 Beach Sub-area
 * No. 5 Beach Group (Queen sector)
 * 5th Battalion King's Regiment (Liverpool)
 * 'M' AA Assault Group (from 80th Anti-Aircraft Brigade)
 * RHQ 73rd Light AA Rgt, RA – Lieutenant-Colonel J.A. Armstrong
 * 218 LAA Bty and 296 LAA Bty less 2 Troops
 * G & H Troops 322 LAA Bty, 93rd LAA Rgt, RA
 * 322 HAA Bty and C Troop 323 HAA Bty, 103rd Heavy AA Rgt, RA
 * B Troop 474 Independent Searchlight Bty, RA
 * 16 Fire Control Post, RA
 * 76 & 103 Coast Observation Detachments, RA
 * One Platoon 112 Company Pioneer Corps (smoke generators)
 * 73 LAA Rgt Workshop, Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (REME)
 * 'N' AA Assault Group (from 80th AA Bde)
 * RHQ 103rd HAA Rgt, RA – Lieutenant-Colonel H.E. Johnston (AA Defence Commander, 101 BSA)
 * D Troop 323 HAA Bty and 324 HAA Bty
 * 220 LAA Bty, 73rd LAA Rgt, RA
 * I Troop 322 LAA Bty, 93rd LAA Rgt, RA
 * C Troop 474 S/L Bty, RA
 * 160 AA Operations Room, RA
 * One Platoon 112 Company, Pioneer Corps
 * 103 HAA Rgt Workshop, REME
 * 18th GHQ Troops Engineers – CRE: Lieutenant-Colonel J.H. Boyd
 * 84th Field Company, RE
 * 91st Field Company, RE
 * 8th & 9th Stores Sections, RE
 * 50th Mechanical Equipment Section, RE
 * 205th Works Section, RE
 * 654th & 722nd Artisan Works Companies, RE
 * Two Advanced Park Sections of 176th Workshop and Park Company, RE
 * 49th Bomb Disposal Section, RE
 * 999th & 1028th Port Operating Companies, RE
 * 940 Inland Water Transport Company, RE
 * Five Companies, Pioneer Corps
 * No. 6 Beach Group (in reserve)
 * 1st Buckinghamshire Battalion, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry

British assault

The assault on Sword began at about 03:00 with the aerial and naval bombardment of German coastal defences and artillery sites. The landing was to be concentrated on Queen Red and Queen White in front of Hermanville-sur-Mer, other approaches having proven impassable due to shoals. At 07:25, the first units set off for the beach. These were the amphibious DD tanks of the 13th/18th Hussars; they were followed closely by the 8th Infantry Brigade, and by Royal Engineers in AVREs and the various odd-looking, specialized vehicles that had been nicknamed 'Hobart's funnies'. The engineers set to work clearing mines and obstacles under a steady hail of small arms fire and artillery fire from Périers Ridge just south of Hermanville. Resistance on the beach was initially fairly strong, with wrecked vehicles piling up and casualties mounting; however, with most of their armoured vehicles successfully landed, the British were able to quickly secure the immediate area. By 09:30 the engineers had cleared seven of the eight exits from the beach, allowing the inland advance to begin.

British and French commandos encountered tough resistance in the seaside town of Ouistreham, on Sword's eastern extremity, but were able to clear it of enemy strongpoints. By 13:00, the 1st Special Service Brigade had reached the bridges on the River Orne and the Caen Canal, linking up with paratroops of the 6th Airborne Division, who were holding the bridges, after earlier disabling German gun batteries in a fierce night-time battle at Merville.

On the western flank of Sword, commandos of the 4th Special Service Brigade advanced to secure Lion-sur-Mer and meet Canadian forces at Juno Beach but encountered strong resistance and were pinned down by heavy fire for several hours. Around the main landing area, the men of the 3rd Infantry Division had secured Hermanville-sur-Mer by 10:00, but were finding tougher going as they slowly fought their way up Périers Ridge and moved inland. Congestion as more men, vehicles and equipment arrived on the beach further complicated matters. It was gradually becoming apparent that the British would not be able to meet the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division, to protect the right flank in an immediate assault on Caen. Troops of the King's Shropshire Light Infantry continued down the Hermanville-Caen road, reaching Biéville-Beuville, close to Caen, but were supported by only a few self-propelled guns, their flanks exposed. During the afternoon, the 21st Panzer Division, based around Caen, launched the only major German counterattack of D-Day.

German counter-attacks

The 21st Panzer Division, with its formidable inventory of some 127 Panzer IV tanks, was intended for use as a rapid response force. However, on the morning of June 6th, it's commander Generalmajor Edgar Feuchtinger was in Paris, and Rommel was in Germany. The division was unable to finalize orders and preparations for a counterattack until late in the day. At about 17:00, two thrusts were launched, east and west of the River Orne. The eastern attack, carried out by II Battalion and supporting units, under Major Hans von Luck, was intended to destroy the 6th Airborne Division's Orne bridgehead but was soon stopped in its tracks by intense Allied air attacks and naval gunfire. To the west, a larger armoured group initially fared somewhat better. Taking advantage of the gap between the Sword and Juno sectors, elements of the 192nd Panzergrenadier Regiment were able to reach the coast at Lion-sur-Mer by 20:00. With few flak units and very little support from the Luftwaffe, they too suffered losses to Allied aircraft. When 250 gliders of the British 6th Airlanding Brigade overflew their positions, on their way to reinforce the Orne bridgehead in Operation Mallard, the Germans, believing they were about to be cut off, retired.

The Luftwaffe was particularly weak in this sector but tried to support the attack with a few of the rare daylight appearances it made on D-Day. Generalfeldmarschall Hugo Sperrle, commanding Luftflotte 3 (Air Fleet 3) was responsible for the air defence of Normandy and ordered all available forces to attack the beachhead. Junkers Ju 88s from Kampfgeschwader 54 (KG 54: Bomber Wing 54) attacked British positions with Butterfly Bombs. III./KG 54 struck Lion-sur-Mer while I./KG 54 bombed shipping at the mouth of the Orne. 145 Wing intercepted and shot down five German aircraft.

Analysis

By the end of D-Day, 28,845 men of I Corps had come ashore across Sword. The British Official Historian, L. F. Ellis, wrote that "in spite of the Atlantic Wall over 156,000 men had been landed in France on the first day of the campaign." British losses in the Sword area amounted to 683 men. The British and Canadians were able to link up and resume the drive on Caen the following day, but three days into the invasion, the advance was halted. On 7 June, Operation Perch, a pincer attack by the 51st (Highland) Infantry Division and XXX Corps was launched to encircle Caen from the east and west flanks. The 21st Panzer Division halted the 51st Division advance and the XXX Corps attack resulted in the Battle of Villers-Bocage and the withdrawal of the leading elements of the 7th Armoured Division soon after. The next offensive, codenamed Operation Epsom, was launched by VIII Corps on 26 June, to envelope Caen from the west. German forces managed to contain the offensive but to do so, they were obliged to commit all their available strength.

On 27 June, the 3rd Infantry Division and its supporting tanks launched Operation Mitten. The objective was to seize two German-occupied châteaux, la Londe and le Landel. The initial evening assault was repulsed but the following morning, attacks gained the objectives and destroyed several German tanks. Operation Mitten cost at least three British tanks and 268 men. In 2003 Copp wrote that fighting for these châteaux made the area the "bloodiest square mile in Normandy". Scarfe wrote in 1947 that, had the operation gone more smoothly, further elements of the division and elements of the 3rd Canadian Division would have launched Operation Aberlour, an ambitious plan to capture several villages north of Caen but the attack was cancelled by Lieutenant-General John Crocker. Several days later I Corps launched a new offensive, codenamed Operation Charnwood, to gain possession of Caen. In a frontal assault, the northern half of the city was captured, but German forces retained possession of the city south of the River Orne. The southern half of Caen was only captured 12 days later by Canadian infantry during Operation Atlantic.

title: Sword Beach


text:
Talk:Chinese Exclusion Act

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Leilani.cuevas.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Thubtran92, Ortiz7913, Gwalker1, Wina45.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Early message
There was an article titled Chinese exclusion. I have turned it into a redirect page. The problem is that the dates given in this article differ slightly, for those of the Chinese Exclusion Act article. Could someone figure out what the accurate dates are?

Here is the text of this former article:

 * The Chinese Exclusion Act was a law passed in the United States in 1883 that forbade immigration of Chinese to the United States for ten years. It was later extended and existed until 1946.

 * See also: Chinese-American

-User:Olivier — Preceding undated comment added 11:18, 14 October 2002 (UTC)

Requested Moves

Untitled

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

don't move, twice. Before reopening this debate yet again, think. — Nightst a  llion  (?) Seen this already? 13:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Exclusion Act (United States) → Chinese Exclusion Act (Apr 2006)

 * Chinese Exclusion Act is now a disambig, linking to similar U.S. and Canadian laws, however only one of them was formally named the Chinese Exclusion Act, while the Canadian law had a different title, and may have been informally referred to as the "Chinese Exclusion Act." Please, stick with formal names here.

Votes

 * OPPOSE This already was voted on. 70.51.11.101 23:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

NOTE: The below discussion is from February 2005; the April 2006 discussion should be above this line.

Chinese Exclusion Act (United States) → Chinese Exclusion Act (Feb 2005)
Absurd redirect; no other nation has had a "Chinese Exclusion Act"; apparently the other meaning is a "nickname coined by the Chinese-Canadian community" for the Chinese Immigration Act. Neutralitytalk 06:50, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

Votes

 * Just a note to say that the name "Chinese Exclusion Act" suggests that it is an "Exclusion Act" that is Chinese, jguk 10:15, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose the common name of the Canadian Chinese Immigration Act is the "Chinese Exclusion Act." - SimonP 04:44, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agree with SimonP BlankVerse 09:53, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. We don't typically disambiguate between an official name and a nickname, especially when the former is the better known. →Raul654 06:48, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose better known? The Chinese Immigration Act of Canada excluded Chinese almost entirely, while the Chinese Exclusion Act of the US just limited immigration, so the effect of thw two laws is most like the name of the other one. 70.51.11.101 22:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
IT WAS ILLEGAL FOR CHINESE WOMEN TO IMMIGRATE UNDER CHINESE LAW Until 1912 Chinese women were not free to immigrate under Qing Law. Exceptions were made by Qing officials for female slaves and servants who were imported by their Chinese owners; as well as for merchant's and diplomat's wives. The statement in the article sounds like it was the United States restricting Chinese women from joining their husbands and creating a family in the United States. This article is not scholarly and much of the information is incorrect and the analyses (opinions) are likewise flawed. This article needs to be completely rehauled. --Tintle (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

chinese representation in the US
I deleted from the article this sentence: "It is also one of the primary reasons for why Chinese-Americans are slightly underrepresented in the United States (2% of the population) relative to the Han ethnic group's total percentage of the human species' population (about 20%)."

the US has never purported to represent the entire global population, only US population. So the fact that 20% of the globe's population is Han Chinese has no relevance to US representation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.168.21.13 (talk) 07:36, 21 April 2005 (UTC)

Just a question about the national quota
I dont really think that the national quota was 105 immigrants but i dont know how much it really was so if someone could get that information.So Pro Lah 05:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

There is some apparent confusion here, I agree. If Chinese were excluded until the Act was repealed, then how is it that 70% of the hundreds of thousands of immigrants between 1910 and 1940 were allowed to remain? This apparent contradition should be explained in the article. -Jmh123 15:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, this is confusing. This article needs to be longer and more detailed, it is a very important, if sad and little known part of US history. It deserves a much longer and more in-depth article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Encephalomaniac (talk • contribs) 03:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be important to note that there was a huge number of illegal immigration that occurred because of this act and also that not every Chinese person was restricted from entering: it was specifically laborers. A lot of Chinese laborers still entered the U.S. during Exclusion Era by using counterfeit documents and lying to officials. Not only that, but it was extremely profitable for immigration officials and smugglers to get illegal immigrants into the U.S. So the national quota, while representative of how restrictive the U.S. wanted to be with regard to the Chinese, is definitely not reflective at all of the actually movement of Chinese migrants during this time.Rvhyingy (talk) 21:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Restrictive immigration policies not limited to countries listed

 * ''The United States was not the only country to have racially restrictive immigration policies.

China itself had had strict anti-foreigner laws, which were only slackened as a result of concessions forced by the European Powers after the Opium Wars. Immigration of foreign nationals today remains extremely difficult, should they choose to try (unless - perhaps? - they are of Han race). I don't think it's fair to single out "white" countries about restrictive immigration policies when all major states have had them, especially imperial ones; Japan, China, Bali, Thailand, the Ottoman Sultanate, and others. And even once admitted to such a state, strict policies on behaviour, locations of residence and type of profession, inheritance and more; not very much unlike the US, Canada or Australia, and in many cases (especially imperial China's, and Maoist China's) far worse. Skookum1 02:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

and then they were all like sup?

 * Skookum, you talk like a racist. Why do you single out Imperial China now? Because it's Chinese and the article is about racism towards ethnical chinese in new world colonies? Should we also add that the vile negroe Othello viciously strangled Desdemone in the articles on appartheid? Thehairthatdidntgrow 21:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

i agree with skookum, a little perspective on the times would be welcome. the taiping rebellion was an attack against mostly white people by chinese which occured in the decades prior to the chinese exclusion acts. it should be included in the background. also we should include how difficult it is for people to immigrate into china, even today. 69.110.2.8 (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Your facts are completely wrong. The Taiping Rebellion was against the Qing Dynasty.  And due to the Christian nature of the Taiping rebels, they actually embraced Westerners.  Western Mercs, however, fought along side the Qing army because they believed Taiping's version of Christianity was heresy.69.86.213.132 (talk) 04:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that Imperial Chinese immigration policy is relevant to this article. China didn't invite in large numbers of Europeans to build railroads only to pull the rug out from under them. The white people that did come to China were not there to work, but to dominate. The Chinese Exclusion Act had absolutely nothing to do with Americans not being able to immigrate to China and being upset about it. Comparing the two immigration policies is totally irrelevant to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Encephalomaniac (talk • contribs) 03:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The biggest difference is that the United States IS a country based almost entirely on immigration while China is anything but. China is not easy to immigrate to for all countries whereas the US singled out the Chinese. It was a racist policy against the Chinese, pure and simple. 69.86.214.213 (talk) 00:14, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

removed link
I just removed this link from the article page because it lists no actual content, but if anyone wanted to go to the archives to photocopy original documents for inclusion here it might be helpful. Calliopejen1 07:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Chinese And Chinese Americans The National Archives-Pacific Region holds records of the Honolulu and San Francisco offices of the Immigration and Naturalization Service pertaining to Chinese immigration.

How Did this get through congress?
Will someone answer me this, the the fuck did a bill called the "Chinese Exclusion Act" get through congress w/o public dissent/ coup? were we that fucked up back then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.188.176 (talk) 23:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes. Yes, we were. --Lquilter (talk) 00:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, as a matter of fact, this is one of many examples of the racist history of the United States. Kingturtle (talk) 01:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no such Congressional Bill called the "Chinese Exlusion Act" - that is a nickname that has made it into mainstream usage. The document people are referring to was an ammendment to an 1868 treaty and its title is "To execute certain treaty stipulations relating to China." It did not exclude Chinese from entering the United States. It regulated immigration. Chinese women were not free to immigrate at will under Chinese laws, not under United States laws.--Tintle (talk) 14:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Because most Americans supported it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alcuin1 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Not racially motivated?
The source cited to support the line that "the Act was not racially motivated" in fact claims the exact opposite. I am removing this line as most likely subtle vandalism. Subdolous (talk) 23:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

US GOV should apologize for this crime
All minority groups should join force to push US gov to apologize this discrimination they committed. so the equal protection can be a real protection to all minority groups. And also some state laws still have content to ban immigrants of other ethic people, this should be stopped. --
 * Really? And is China going to apologize for all the foreigners killed when China had laws ordering the execution of any foreigners found trying to enter the Middle Realm?  For all the foreigners (mostly unarmed missionaries who put up no resistance) killed in the Taiping and Boxer Rebellions?  For the killing of non-Han since China "consolidated its borders" by overriding local sovereignty in Tibet and Eastern Turkestan?  For the killing of Tibetans in Tibet?  For the killing of prisoners so as to extract their organs for re-sale? How easy it is to accuse another nation of crimes as a way to keep from having to talk about your own.....Skookum1 (talk) 01:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to pick up an old discussion.

Skookumi: your comparison is illogical. What is wrong is wrong. The Chinese Exclusion Act was a racist and discriminatory act. The government responsible for it needs to apologize for it, regardless whether other governments in human history have apologized for their own crimes.

(By the way, why should the current Chinese government, established in 1949, apologizes for the Boxer Rebellion, an event that took place prior to its own existence? Just one example of your illogicality.) 99.25.25.84 (talk) 08:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * By that logic, the current German government has no responsibility to apologize or atone for the Holocaust, since that happened before its own existence. 108.8.58.23 (talk) 14:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

a very pov article
this needs some real cleanup,  looks like some nationalists are here repeating the propoganda they were indoctrinated with as children.

"took up low end wage labor such as restaurant work and laundry",  weren't they also the owners of these businesses?

69.110.2.8 (talk) 05:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Who was excluded?
The article contains two quotes from the act, describing the excluded individuals: This is obviously a huge difference. Which one is correct? AxelBoldt (talk) 01:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "skilled and unskilled laborers employed in mining"
 * “skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining.”

North Adams, Mass.
What role did the Chinese strike-breakers in Norht Adams have in motivating the passage of this bill? See, e.g., A. Gyory's book: http://books.google.co.kr/books?hl=ko&lr=&id=x8OggvKjZSgC&oi=fnd&pg=PP13&dq=%22north+adams%22+chinese+exclusion+act&ots=dpgtd0HH30&sig=6WPqlrSDXFsI5xCw7olN4zS5ePg#v=onepage&q=%22north%20adams%22%20&f=false; H. Hill: Anti-Oriental agitation and the rise of working-class racism.Kdammers (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Two paragraphs added
Two paragraphs added under the repeal and current status section to reflect actions taken by the CA State Legislature in 2014. For disclosure purposes, I do work for the State Senate, Communications Director for Senator Bob Huff. I am not employed by Senator Kevin de Leon, although he is mentioned for his work. --Billbird2111 (talk) 03:07, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Chinese Exclusion Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140505105756/http://librarysource.uchastings.edu/library/research/special-collections/wong-kim-ark/1858%20Cal.%20Stat.%20295.pdf to http://librarysource.uchastings.edu/library/research/special-collections/wong-kim-ark/1858%20Cal.%20Stat.%20295.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Resources for new content addition
I plan to expand more on the consequences/events following the Chinese Exclusion Act known as the "Driving Out" period. Specifically within this period, I would like to highlight two main massacres, Seattle and Snake River.

Below are my resources that I plan to use. Many of them are taken from Iris Chang's book Chinese in America. Please review and advise. Thank you in advance!

Nokes, R. Gregory (Fall 2006). "A Most Daring Outrage: Murders at Chinese Massacre Cove, 1887". Oregon Historical Quarterly. 107 (3). Archived from the original on 28 January 2007. Retrieved 20 March 2007.

https://oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/chinese_massacre_at_deep_creek/#.WgaAFhNSzOQ

Judy Yung, Unbound Feet, p. 21; R. David Arkush and Leo O. Lee, Land without Ghosts, p. 57; Tzu-Kuei Yen, pp. 153-62; Craig Stori, Incident at Bitter Creek: The Story of the Rock Springs Chinese Massacre (Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1991).

David H. Stratton, “The Snake River Massacre of Chinese Miners, 1887,” in Duane A. Smith, ed., A Taste of the West: Essays in Honor of Robert Athearn, p. 124, as cited in Roger Daniels, Asian America, p. 64.

the secretary of war dispatched troops to Seattle: Doug Chin, “The Anti-Chinese Movement,” The International Examiner, January 6, 1982.

“special tax”: Ruthanne Lum McCunn, p. 51.

beating up several Chinese: Ibid.

Information about the second Seattle riot: Harper’s Weekly, March 6, 1886; Lorraine Barker Hildebrand, pp. 69-74

Chang, Iris (2004). The Chinese in America. A Narrative History. Penguin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thubtran92 (talk • contribs) 05:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

First Two Paragraphs - Edits
I've edited the first 2 paragraphs for clarity, and to link the growing animosity against Chinese in California to the eventual nationwide legislative efforts to ban Chinese immigration. California specifically attempted to ban Chinese immigration instate, only for the State Supreme Court to point out that such laws were unconstitutional (taking away the power over immigration from the federal government). These state efforts undoubtedly helped push national efforts however, and whether or not they lead directly to the Exclusion Act (as Coolidge suggests in her California Thesis), the end result in both California and the nation was a series of increasingly regressive, restrictive laws. It was a period of nearly 30 years of anti-Chinese sentiment leading up to the Exclusion Act, and I think that needs to be clearly stated. Gwalker1 (talk) 22:06, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chinese Exclusion Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130516131106/http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1879/archive/1879-constitution.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1879/archive/1879-constitution.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Bubonic Plague in Chinatown
A new section in the Chinese Exclusion Act Article will be added

The Bubonic Plague outbreak in San Francisco Chinatown strengthened Anti-Chinese sentiment in all of California despite science research at the time showing it was caused by some kind of "germ". When the first round of people died from this plague, the companies and the state denied the fact that there was a plague, eventually other states knew what was going on and stopped trading with California. The blame was put on the Chinese community. The plague did not derive from Chinatown. It was due to the unsanitary conditions and population density that outbreaks such as this one were spread quickly, and therefore affected a large number of people in this community. It's first deaths in San Francisco were in 1898, a ship from a French bark had some passengers who had died of the plague. After its arrival in San Francisco, 18 more Chinatown residents died of the same symptoms. The mayor decided not to release a public Warning of the outbreak, thinking it would affect San Francisco's commercial business. Chinatown was quarantined, and sanitary services were suspended for some time until presence of bacteriological source was found. A sanitary campaign was launched, however many residents chose to avoid anything and everything that had to do with the plague due to fear and humiliation. As more and more deaths occurred, the city began being more aggressive, and they started checking nearly everyone in Chinatown for any signs of disease. Therefore the Chinese community began to distrust the government even more. Ortiz7913 (talk) 05:57, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I think this should be removed. This article is about an act in Congress, not about Anti-Chinese sentiment or the history of Chinatown. 180.157.208.38 (talk) 00:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

 * 4 years later, but: I agree that this section should not be part of the article, as it is only very loosely related to the actual act.--Shmarrighan (talk) 06:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Suggested Sources: Big text Bibliography- Seattle, OCA. “The Chinese Exclusion Acts: A Racist Chapter in U.S. Civil Rights History.” OCA Seattle, 22 May 2012, ocaseattle.org/2012/05/21/the-chinese-exclusion-acts-a-racist-chapter-in-u-s-civil-rights-history/. - www.bing.com/cr?IG=8A65C697A66B495BA76C57F8498B041F&CID=0B162B5F543A68E8319420C95595697F&rd=1&h=_qJ2gU4hRgnXJH_W8qLjFEkSQTmD4Kc36Hc3Q_NrEto&v=1&r=https%3a%2f%2fwww.researchgate.net%2fpublication%2f238047641_Fearing_yellow_imagining_white_Media_analysis_of_the_Chinese_Exclusion_Act_of_1882&p=DevEx,5065.1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leilani.cuevas (talk • contribs) 22:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Suggested Sources
Bibliography: - www.bing.com/cr?IG=8A65C697A66B495BA76C57F8498B041F&CID=0B162B5F543A68E8319420C95595697F&rd=1&h=_qJ2gU4hRgnXJH_W8qLjFEkSQTmD4Kc36Hc3Q_NrEto&v=1&r=https%3a%2f%2fwww.researchgate.net%2fpublication%2f238047641_Fearing_yellow_imagining_white_Media_analysis_of_the_Chinese_Exclusion_Act_of_1882&p=DevEx,5065.1. - Seattle, OCA. “The Chinese Exclusion Acts: A Racist Chapter in U.S. Civil Rights History.” OCA Seattle, 22 May 2012, ocaseattle.org/2012/05/21/the-chinese-exclusion-acts-a-racist-chapter-in-u-s-civil-rights-history/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leilani.cuevas (talk • contribs) 22:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * it's solid and very advanced. Rjensen (talk) 00:08, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Se vcs quiserem traduzir este artigo é só dar o toque. 2804:14C:5BB1:9AC7:3336:53CC:B8D1:652B (talk) 22:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Trump travel ban
This is regarding 's addition of the dubious template to the claim that, with the reason field referencing the Trump travel ban.

So first of all, the Trump actions were not a law, but a set of executive orders/actions. They were arguably aimed at Muslims, but Muslims are not an ethnic or national group. You could say they were aimed at several national groups, but in any case they were not part of immigration law, but about the issuance of visas. I'm not remotely defending the ban, but I don't think the current language is inaccurate or misleading.

I do agree the claim should be cited, but even if the citation predates the Trump actions, I think that's OK. --Trovatore (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

 * I don't think using the distinction between law and executive action; or issuance of visa and naturalization (indeed, without being able to get a visa how can one become a citizen?) is of the essence here. I think it is appropriate to say it is the only action till the Trump travel ban, which banned issuance of visas wholesale to seven (and later) affected nations. In some ways the Trump travel ban was even more restrictive since it banned everyone with the exception of diplomats. 128.54.26.155 (talk) 04:43, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Category removal?
from (1882 in the United States) because it “fits better in subcategory American law”. I just want to go on record saying that I think it it should be both. It’s an important part of American history overall. ChecksMix (talk) 01:38, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: History of Immigration to the U.S.
— Assignment last updated by Jbjohnson123 (talk) 18:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Added material on 'Issues of the Act'
I plan on adding in some further information on issues with the act. Adding how this act can be seen as the beginning of 'gatekeeping' ideologies and is the first policy restricting individuals through the use of racial categories and categorizing races from most to least desirable.

Currently the only issue mentioned is economic issues and I would like to expand on the issues created within the Chinese community. Drawing attention to the violence and fear they suffered and day to day targeting caused by the exclusion act. I have appropriate citations from the work of Erika Lee.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks C.cooling1 (talk) 14:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Good that you will work on this article,, and I agree you are right that some points need to be added in addition to the economic impact (though some sections of the article are too long and not directly connected to the topic of this article). One point that I don't see is the strategies for getting around the law, such as the Paper sons, which might go under "Issues of the act." I also don't see anything explaining why Arthur vetoed it, since it contradicted a ratified treaty, the Burlingame Treaty, which is mentioned only in passing. You might look through the article for cruft.ch (talk) 20:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That's a great idea thank you. I post what I have and add in sections on those as soon as I can once I've fully researched them.
 * I agree sections of this article do not relate and are far to long. We could remove some and make it more susynced. C.cooling1 (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Race, Law, and Politics
— Assignment last updated by Lefeverk (talk) 17:19, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Chinese Exclusion Act


text:
The Independent

The Independent is a British online newspaper. It was established in 1986 as a national morning printed paper. Nicknamed the Indy, it began as a broadsheet and changed to tabloid format in 2003. The last printed edition was published on Saturday 26 March 2016, leaving only the online edition.

The newspaper was controlled by Tony O'Reilly's Irish Independent News & Media from 1997 until it was sold to the Russian oligarch and former KGB Officer Alexander Lebedev in 2010. Lebedev also co-owned Novaya Gazeta alongside Mikhail Gorbachev until the latter's death on 30 August 2022. In 2017, Sultan Muhammad Abuljadayel bought a 30% stake in The Independent.

The daily edition was named National Newspaper of the Year at the 2004 British Press Awards. The website and mobile app had a combined monthly reach of 19,826,000 in 2021. The Independent won the Brand of the Year Award in The Drum Awards for Online Media 2023.

1980s
Launched in 1986, the first issue of The Independent was published on 7 October in broadsheet format. It was produced by Newspaper Publishing plc and created by Andreas Whittam Smith, Stephen Glover and Matthew Symonds. All three partners were former journalists at The Daily Telegraph who had left the paper towards the end of Lord Hartwell's ownership. Marcus Sieff was the first chairman of Newspaper Publishing, and Whittam Smith took control of the paper.

The paper was created at a time of a fundamental change in British newspaper publishing. Rupert Murdoch was challenging long-accepted practices of the print unions and ultimately defeated them in the Wapping dispute. Consequently, production costs could be reduced which created openings for more competition. As a result of controversy around Murdoch's move to Wapping, the plant was effectively having to function under siege from sacked print workers picketing outside. The Independent attracted some of the staff from the two Murdoch broadsheets who had chosen not to move to his company's new headquarters. Launched with the advertising slogan "It is. Are you?", and challenging both The Guardian for centre-left readers and The Times as the newspaper of record, The Independent reached a circulation of more than 400,000 by 1989. Competing in a moribund market, The Independent sparked a general freshening of newspaper design as well as, within a few years, a price war in the market sector.

1990s
When The Independent launched The Independent on Sunday in 1990, sales were less than anticipated, partly due to the launch of the Sunday Correspondent four months prior, although this direct rival closed at the end of November 1990. Some aspects of production merged with the main paper, although the Sunday paper retained a largely distinct editorial staff. In the 1990s, The Independent was faced with price cutting by the Murdoch titles, and started an advertising campaign accusing The Times and The Daily Telegraph of reflecting the views of their proprietors, Rupert Murdoch and Conrad Black. It featured spoofs of the other papers' mastheads with the words The Rupert Murdoch or The Conrad Black, with The Independent below the main title.

had financial problems. A number of other media companies were interested in the paper. Tony O'Reilly's media group and Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) had bought a stake of about a third each by mid-1994. In March 1995, Newspaper Publishing was restructured with a rights issue, splitting the shareholding into O'Reilly's Independent News & Media (43%), MGN (43%), and Prisa (publisher of El País) (12%).

In April 1996, there was another refinancing, and in March 1998, O'Reilly bought the other shares of the company for £30 million, and assumed the company's debt. Brendan Hopkins headed Independent News, Andrew Marr was appointed editor of The Independent, and Rosie Boycott became editor of The Independent on Sunday. Marr introduced a dramatic if short-lived redesign which won critical favour but was a commercial failure, partly as a result of a limited promotional budget. Marr admitted his changes had been a mistake in his book, My Trade.

Boycott left in April 1998 to join the Daily Express, and Marr left in May 1998, later becoming the BBC's political editor. Simon Kelner was appointed as the editor. By this time, the circulation had fallen below 200,000. Independent News spent heavily to increase circulation, and the paper went through several redesigns. While circulation increased, it did not approach the level which had been achieved in 1989, or restore profitability. Job cuts and financial controls reduced the morale of journalists and the quality of the product.

2000s
Ivan Fallon, on the board since 1995 and formerly a key figure at The Sunday Times, replaced Hopkins as head of Independent News & Media in July 2002. By mid-2004, the newspaper was losing £5 million per year. A gradual improvement meant that by 2006, circulation was at a nine-year high.

In November 2008, following further staff cuts, production was moved to Northcliffe House, in Kensington High Street, the headquarters of Associated Newspapers. The two newspaper groups' editorial, management and commercial operations remained separate, but they shared services including security, information technology, switchboard and payroll.

2010s
On 25 March 2010, Independent News & Media sold the newspaper to a new company owned by the family of Russian oligarch Alexander Lebedev for a nominal £1 fee and £9.25 million over the next 10 months, choosing this option over closing The Independent and The Independent on Sunday, which would have cost £28 million and £40 million respectively, due to long-term contracts. Alexander's son Evgeny became chairman of the new company, with Alexander becoming a board director. In 2009, Lebedev had bought a controlling stake in the London Evening Standard. Two weeks later, editor Roger Alton resigned.

In July 2011, The Independent's columnist Johann Hari was stripped of the Orwell Prize he had won in 2008 after claims, to which Hari later admitted, of plagiarism and inaccuracy. In January 2012, Chris Blackhurst, editor of The Independent, told the Leveson inquiry that the scandal had "severely damaged" the newspaper's reputation. He nevertheless told the inquiry that Hari would return as a columnist in "four to five weeks". Hari later announced that he would not return to The Independent. Jonathan Foreman contrasted The Independent's reaction to the scandal unfavourably with the reaction of American newspapers to similar incidents such as the Jayson Blair case, which led to resignations of editors, "deep soul-searching", and "new standards of exactitude being imposed". The historian Guy Walters suggested that Hari's fabrications had been an open secret among the newspaper's staff and that their internal inquiry was a "facesaving exercise".

A proportion of articles are now behind a pay wall; that section is titled "Independent Minds". The Independent and The Independent on Sunday endorsed "Remain" in the Brexit referendum. In March 2016, The Independent decided to close its print edition and become an online newspaper; the last printed edition was published on Saturday 26 March 2016. The Independent on Sunday published its last print edition on 20 March 2016 and was closed following that.

Format and design
The Independent began publishing as a broadsheet, in a series of celebrated designs. The final version was designed by Carroll, Dempsey and Thirkell following a commission by Nicholas Garland who, along with Alexander Chancellor, was unhappy with designs produced by Raymond Hawkey and Michael McGuiness – on seeing the proposed designs, Chancellor had said "I thought we were joining a serious paper". The first edition was designed and implemented by Michael Crozier, who was Executive Editor, Design and Picture, from pre-launch in 1986 to 1994.

From September 2003, the paper was produced in both broadsheet and tabloid-sized versions, with the same content in each. The tabloid edition was termed "compact" to distance itself from the more sensationalist reporting style usually associated with "tabloid" newspapers in the UK, preferring to remain focused on hard news (similarly to the tabloid-size edition of The Times.) After launching in the London area and then in North West England, the smaller format appeared gradually throughout the UK. Soon afterwards, Rupert Murdoch's Times followed suit, introducing its own tabloid-sized version. Prior to these changes, The Independent had a daily circulation of around 217,500, the lowest of any major national British daily, a figure that climbed by 15% as of March 2004 (to 250,000). Throughout much of 2006, circulation stagnated at a quarter of a million. On 14 May 2004, The Independent produced its last weekday broadsheet, having stopped producing a Saturday broadsheet edition in January. The Independent on Sunday published its last simultaneous broadsheet on 9 October 2005, and thereafter followed a compact design until the print edition was discontinued.

On 12 April 2005, The Independent redesigned its layout to a more European feel, similar to France's Libération. The redesign was carried out by a Barcelona-based design studio. The weekday second section was subsumed within the main paper, double-page feature articles became common in the main news sections, and there were revisions to the front and back covers. A new second section, "Extra", was introduced on 25 April 2006. It is similar to The Guardians "G2" and The Timess "Times2", containing features, reportage and games, including sudoku. In June 2007, The Independent on Sunday consolidated its content into a news section which included sports and business, and a magazine focusing on life and culture. On 23 September 2008, the main newspaper became full-colour, and "Extra" was replaced by an "Independent Life Supplement" focusing on different themes each day.

Three weeks after the acquisition of the paper by Alexander Lebedev and Evgeny Lebedev in 2010, the paper was relaunched with another redesign on 20 April. The new format featured smaller headlines and a new pullout "Viewspaper" section, which contained the paper's comment and feature articles.

Front pages
Following the 2003 switch in format, The Independent became known for its unorthodox and campaigning front pages, which frequently relied on images, graphics or lists rather than traditional headlines and written news content. For example, following the Kashmir earthquake in 2005, it used its front page to urge its readers to donate to its appeal fund, and following the publication of the Hutton Report into the death of British government scientist David Kelly, its front page simply carried the word "Whitewash?" In 2003, the paper's editor, Simon Kelner, was named "Editor of the Year" at the What the Papers Say awards, partly in recognition of, according to the judges, his "often arresting and imaginative front-page designs". In 2008, as he was stepping down as editor, he stated that it was possible to "overdo the formula" and that the style of the paper's front pages perhaps needed "reinvention". Under the subsequent editorship of Chris Blackhurst, the campaigning, poster-style front pages were scaled back in favour of more conventional news stories.

Sections
The weekday, Saturday and Sunday editions of The Independent all included supplements and pull-out subsections:

Online presence
On 23 January 2008, The Independent relaunched its online edition. The relaunched site introduced a new look, better access to the blog service, priority on image and video content, and additional areas of the site including art, architecture, fashion, gadgets and health. The paper launched podcast programmes such as "The Independent Music Radio Show", "The Independent Travel Guides", "The Independent Sailing Podcasts", and "The Independent Video Travel Guides". Since 2009, the website has carried short video news bulletins provided by the Al Jazeera English news channel.

In 2014, The Independent launched a sister website, i100, a "shareable" journalism site with similarities to Reddit and Upworthy.

Political views
The Independent is generally described as centrist, centre-left, liberal, and liberal-left. When the paper was established in 1986, the founders intended its political stance to reflect the centre of the British political spectrum and thought that it would attract readers primarily from The Times and The Daily Telegraph. It has been seen as leaning to the left-wing of the political spectrum, making it more a competitor to The Guardian; however, The Independent tends to take a liberal, pro-market stance on economic issues. The Independent on Sunday referred to itself as a "proudly liberal newspaper".

The paper has highlighted what it refers to as war crimes being committed by pro-government forces in the Darfur region of Sudan. The paper has been a strong supporter of electoral reform. In 1997, The Independent on Sunday launched a campaign for the decriminalisation of cannabis. Ten years later, it reversed itself, arguing that skunk, the cannabis strain "smoked by the majority of young Britons" in 2007, had become "25 times stronger than resin sold a decade ago". The paper's opinion on the British monarchy has sometimes been described as republican, though it officially identifies as reformist, wishing for a reformed monarchy that "reflects the nation over which it reigns and which is accountable to the people for its activities". Originally, it avoided royal stories, Whittam Smith later saying he thought the British press was "unduly besotted" with the Royal Family and that a newspaper could "manage without" stories about the monarchy.

In 2007, Alan Rusbridger, editor of The Guardian, said of The Independent: "The emphasis on views, not news, means that the reporting is rather thin, and it loses impact on the front page the more you do that". In a 12 June 2007 speech, British Prime Minister Tony Blair called The Independent a "viewspaper", saying it "was started as an antidote to the idea of journalism as views not news. That was why it was called the Independent. Today it is avowedly a viewspaper not merely a newspaper". The Independent criticised Blair's comments the following day; it later changed format to include a "Viewspaper" insert in the centre of the regular newspaper, designed to feature most of the opinion columns and arts reviews. A leader published on the day of the 2008 London mayoral election compared the candidates and said that, if the newspaper had a vote, it would vote first for the Green Party candidate, Siân Berry, noting the similarity between her priorities and those of The Independent, and secondly, with "rather heavy heart", for the incumbent, Ken Livingstone.

An Ipsos MORI poll estimated that in the 2010 United Kingdom general election, 44% of regular readers voted Liberal Democrat, 32% voted Labour, and 14% voted Conservative, compared to 23%, 29%, and 36%, respectively, of the overall electorate. On the eve of the 2010 general election, The Independent supported the Liberal Democrats, arguing that "they are longstanding and convincing champions of civil liberties, sound economics, international co-operation on the great global challenges and, of course, fundamental electoral reform. These are all principles that this newspaper has long held dear." Before the 2015 United Kingdom general election, The Independent on Sunday desisted from advising its readers how to vote, writing that "this does not mean that we are a bloodless, value-free news-sheet. We have always been committed to social justice", but the paper recognised that it was up the readers to "make up [their] own mind about whether you agree with us or not". Rather than support a particular party, the paper urged all its reader to vote as "a responsibility of common citizenship". On 4 May 2015, the weekday version of The Independent said that a continuation of the Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition after the general election would be a positive outcome.

At the end of July 2018, The Independent led a campaign they called the "Final Say", a change.org petition by former editor Christian Broughton, for a binding referendum on the Brexit deal between the UK and the European Union. As of October 2018, Independent Arabia is owned and managed by Saudi Research and Marketing Group (SRMG), a major publishing organisation with close ties to the Saudi royal family, and further news websites of The Independent in Persian, Turkish and Urdu run by the same company are planned. In the 2024 United Kingdom general election, The Independent endorsed the Labour Party.

Editors
There have also been various guest editors over the years, such as Elton John on 1 December 2010, The Body Shop's Anita Roddick on 19 June 2003 and U2's Bono in 2006.

Writers and columnists

 * Predominantly in The Independent:

 * Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
 * Bruce Anderson
 * Paul Arden
 * Archie Bland
 * Thom Brooks
 * Andrew Brown (writer)
 * Cooper Brown
 * Michael Brown
 * Simon Calder
 * Ben Chu
 * Alexa Chung
 * Rob Cowan
 * Sloane Crosley
 * Tracey Emin
 * Nigel Farage
 * Mitch Feierstein
 * Andrew Feinberg
 * Helen Fielding
 * Robert Fisk
 * Eric Garcia
 * Chris Gulker
 * Ian Hamilton
 * Howard Jacobson
 * Alex James
 * Peter Jenkins
 * Owen Jones
 * Andrew Keen
 * Dominic Lawson
 * John Lichfield
 * Philip Llewellin
 * Laura Lyons
 * Andy McSmith
 * Donald MacIntyre
 * Serena Mackesy
 * Tracey MacLeod
 * Rhodri Marsden
 * Jan McGirk
 * Deborah Orr
 * Christina Patterson
 * Peter Popham
 * Simon Read
 * Steve Richards
 * Lizzie Dearden
 * Ash Sarkar
 * Alexei Sayle
 * Will Self
 * LJK Setright
 * Mark Steel
 * Catherine Townsend
 * Paul Vallely
 * Brian Viner
 * Lynne Walker
 * Andreas Whittam Smith
 * Claudia Winkleman

 * Predominantly The Independent on Sunday:

 * Janet Street-Porter—Editor-at-Large
 * Kate Bassett—Theatre
 * Patrick Cockburn, John Rentoul, Joan Smith, Paul Vallely, and Alan Watkins—"Comment & Debate"
 * Peter Cole—"On the Press"
 * Rupert Cornwell—"Out of America"
 * Hermione Eyre—Reviews
 * Jenny Gilbert—Dance
 * Christopher Hirst and Lucinda Rogers—"The Weasel" (weekly illustrated column 1995–2008)
 * Dom Joly—"First Up" in The Sunday Review
 * Tim Minogue and David Randall—"Observatory"
 * Cole Moreton—"News Analysis" (Regular double-spread)
 * Anna Picard—Opera and Classical
 * Simon Price—Rock and Pop

Photographers

 * Timothy Allen
 * Craig Easton
 * Brian Harris

Longford Prize
The Independent sponsors the Longford Prize, in memory of Lord Longford.

The Independent on Sunday
The Independent on Sunday (IoS) was the Sunday sister newspaper of The Independent. It ceased to exist in 2016, the last edition being published on 20 March.

The i
In October 2010, the i, a compact sister newspaper, was launched. The i is a separate newspaper but uses some of the same material. It was later sold to regional newspaper company Johnston Press, becoming that publisher's flagship national newspaper.

Indy100
The online news site indy100 was announced by The Independent in February 2016, to be written by journalists but with stories selected by 'upvotes' from readers.

The (RED) Independent
The Independent supported U2 lead singer Bono's Product RED brand by creating The (RED) Independent, an occasional edition that gave half the day's proceeds to the charity. The first edition was in May 2006. Edited by Bono, it drew high sales.

A September 2006 edition of The (RED) Independent, designed by fashion designer Giorgio Armani, drew controversy due to its cover shot, showing model Kate Moss in blackface for an article about AIDS in Africa.

Awards and nominations
The Independent was awarded "National Newspaper of the Year" for 2003 and the Independent on Sunday was awarded "Front Page of the Year" for 2014's "Here is the news, not the propaganda", printed on 5 October 2014.

In January 2013, The Independent was nominated for the Responsible Media of the Year award at the British Muslim Awards.

In popular culture
The Independent is regularly referenced in the Apple TV+ comedy Ted Lasso as the employer of recurring character Trent Crimm (James Lance), a sceptical reporter who is very critical of Ted's coaching but touched by his compassion.

title: The Independent