Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ckn

Daily Mail watch - part 448

118 posts in this topic

True, but in the mails case it is more hypocritical given their ''moral'' stance. 

Their 'moral' stance looks even more threadbare if you type the rather creepy phrase "all grown up" into their search box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their 'moral' stance looks even more threadbare if you type the rather creepy phrase "all grown up" into their search box.

 

I dread to think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dread to think...

It's quite (in)famous. I believe one of their latest ''subjects'' was about 13. :O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it the Mail who urged people to vote for Moseley in the thirties, and also supported Hitler? It was certainly the Mail that published the notorious (and now known to be faked) Zinoviev letter. There was the Ince in Makerfield slag heaps scandal which IIRC involved a fake letter either from or to Wilson, which of course was timed to be run at the same time at the second 1974 election. The Mail really is a terrible paper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not going to argue because I can't remember, but I'm sure it was proved at the time that Wilson's signature had been forged. The Tories get up to stuff like this all the time, but no one knows about it because of the compliant press - in particular the Daily Mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The Tories get up to stuff like this all the time, but no one knows about it because of the compliant press - in particular the Daily Mail.

Yet amazingly, you do know about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to argue because I can't remember, but I'm sure it was proved at the time that Wilson's signature had been forged. The Tories get up to stuff like this all the time, but no one knows about it because of the compliant press - in particular the Daily Mail.

Then why bring it into the debate if you don't know? If no one knows about it because if the compliant press then how come you do? Then again as you say you don't actually know: but if you do know how did you find out bearing in mind the compliant press make sure nobody knows? If you catch my drift 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the Daily Mail most days. Well, the online version anyway. It's probably the easiest format of all the newspapers to read, it has 90% of its news on one page rather than hidden away on obscure sub-pages. I have to read it with a mental filter on though that means I take very little at face value and I'll read the more important stories again in a more rational newspaper (Telegraph, Guardian, Indy) to get a different view.

I find it a very useful intellectual exercise reading the Mail. When they're strongly against someone, or something, I deliberately become devil's advocate to see if that gives me more context. It's quite amusing how often that my devil's advocate viewpoint is similar to that shown by the Guardian or Indy's view of the subject. I do it in reverse with the Guardian when they publish a flighty left-wing puff-piece, I ask myself "What would Paul Dacre say about this?" It certainly makes the morning newspapers more interesting!

I have used the daily mail as a quick indication of my stance on issues, generally if they are in favour I'm opposed.

I remember being genuinely undecided on the PR issue, being able to see solid arguments on both sides. On the day I checked the Mail's editorial stance and voted against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember being genuinely undecided on the PR issue, being able to see solid arguments on both sides. On the day I checked the Mail's editorial stance and voted against it.

 

For God's sake don't start another Promotion and Relegation thread. Lobby's only just got over his last stress-induced heart attack.

;):biggrin:

 

 

 

Good to have you back. We thought you'd been sent with Severus on a covert RU mission to spy on the NRL .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet amazingly, you do know about it.

I know about the forged signature because it was proved in court. But it is forty years ago and details are a little hazy. What's not hazy is the atmosphere of poison that emerges from the Mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets face it, The left of centre papers are hardly going to expose this sort of thing...and of they did , they have so few readers that no one would see it anyway.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485412/Tom-Watson-union-vote-rigging-scandal-Explosive-accusation-Labour-candidate-Falkirk-seat.html

 

I also see Shadow's point. Indeed, I do exactly that myself. I read something in The Guardian and then take the opposite stance.

 

 

Of course, the slag heap scandal was indeed that but the Mail and Express were silence by writs  but eventually  that was not enough for the whole sordid story to come out : Wilson, Marcia Williams, Tony Field, Ronald Milhench, Arnold Goodman, 

 

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=40MJl81dYxQC&pg=PT278&lpg=PT278&dq=ince+slag+heaps&source=bl&ots=6CyihapAlB&sig=Hhgw_P41tpUYP_nFrUzJ2mAyA78&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oHRzUvOBHoGthQeHlYDgDg&ved=0CGMQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=ince%20slag%20heaps&f=false

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/baroness-falkender-the-lavender-lady-479040.html

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/8/newsid_2539000/2539513.stm

 

Wislon's tame lawyer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Goodman,_Baron_Goodman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it the Mail who urged people to vote for Moseley in the thirties, and also supported Hitler? It was certainly the Mail that published the notorious (and now known to be faked) Zinoviev letter. There was the Ince in Makerfield slag heaps scandal which IIRC involved a fake letter either from or to Wilson, which of course was timed to be run at the same time at the second 1974 election. The Mail really is a terrible paper.

 

 

Are you absolutely sure that was anything to do with The Mail?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know about the forged signature because it was proved in court. But it is forty years ago and details are a little hazy. What's not hazy is the atmosphere of poison that emerges from the Mail.

We know about the atmosphere of poison q.v. that's what the thread us about

What is questionable and in my view objectionable is the idea that those who read it are tainted by it and guilty therefore by association

 

Presumably a Google search will bring up what was bound to have been a high profile cause celebre: this might help you to back up your statement on the other hand the media might have suppressed it, since as you say that is what they do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets face it, The left of centre papers are hardly going to expose this sort of thing...and of they did , they have so few readers that no one would see it anyway.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485412/Tom-Watson-union-vote-rigging-scandal-Explosive-accusation-Labour-candidate-Falkirk-seat.html

 

I also see Shadow's point. Indeed, I do exactly that myself. I read something in The Guardian and then take the opposite stance.

 

 

I do neither

I make my own mind up

What attracts me to a newspaper is the quality and variety of the writing, the crossword, the arts reviews particularly books

 

The mail and the express have a small minded mean spirited xenophobic hysteria about them which I view with extreme distaste. I can't think of an insightful, witty or craftsman like writer employed by them

So if I wish to read the right wing press then it's the Times and Sunday Times and occasionally the telegraph 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used the daily mail as a quick indication of my stance on issues, generally if they are in favour I'm opposed.

I remember being genuinely undecided on the PR issue, being able to see solid arguments on both sides. On the day I checked the Mail's editorial stance and voted against it.

And democracy dies a slow death. Here's a clue. You are supposed to make up your own mind based on the different arguments. I voted in favour but it had naff all to do with any editorials either pro or against. I made my own mind up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not sure he is really being serious. I'm sure he  considers all angles, reads all opinions, then makes his mind up on all available evidence, before deciding that The Mail is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not sure he is really being serious. I'm sure he  considers all angles, reads all opinions, then makes his mind up on all available evidence, before deciding that The Mail is wrong.

I hope so.

If the Mail was against arsenic being added to the water supply, you would hope that Shadow wasn't in favour just because he hates the Mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope so.

If the Mail was against arsenic being added to the water supply, you would hope that Shadow wasn't in favour just because he hates the Mail.

you'd hope so but.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are an awful lot of experts on here about the Mail. Perhaps they are closet readers?

Come on out chaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are an awful lot of experts on here about the Mail. Perhaps they are closet readers?

Come on out chaps.

I check it out from time to time because I'm interested in newspapers

the nature of the Mail's journalism and the quality of it is well known to the point of being nototious

Mail journalists and former journalists and their attitudes are well known to the point of being infamous-my favourite is/was mad mel, and the template for Private Eye's Polly Filla Allison Pearson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The on-line version of the Mail is in my opinion a screaming, hysterical rabble-rousing Little Englander ...that appeals to many millions. Equally, the people are not necessarily stupid morons. The paper is, in my view on the rare occasions when I have seen it, somewhat more detailed and less histrionic.

 

However, from time to time they get their teeth into something, such as the Stephen Lawrence case or like this one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2486824/Did-Unite-tamper-grandmothers-statement-Key-witnesss-bombshell-accusation-vote-rigging-storm.html

 

Equally, I don't like the Sunday Times for a number of reasons, though who can doubt the good they did with their Thalidomide campaign.

 

The secret, in my view is, as L'Ange says, to take in info from all sources and form you own views on issues.

 

But please don't deprive me of my enjoyment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every mainstream newspaper has its proper journalists who really do fantastic work.  For example, I haven't missed The Times at all since it went behind the paywall but I strongly applauded them for their relentless pursuit of the story around the miners' compensation scandal, a fairly difficult story to get to the bottom of mainly involving people who aren't target Times readers in areas outside of their core catchment zones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every mainstream newspaper has its proper journalists who really do fantastic work.  For example, I haven't missed The Times at all since it went behind the paywall but I strongly applauded them for their relentless pursuit of the story around the miners' compensation scandal, a fairly difficult story to get to the bottom of mainly involving people who aren't target Times readers in areas outside of their core catchment zones.

 

They've also done a fair amount of good work about the family courts and cycle safety.

 

However, they also are relentlessly downbeat about rugby league.

 

Swings, roundabouts ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017