Archived

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

ckn

Daily Mail watch - part 448

118 posts in this topic

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.

it isn't so much opinions and opinion formimg, but the quality of the writing.

I enjoy good feature articles and regular columnists, whether I agree with them or not or like them or not.

For instance I enjoy Jeremy Clarkson and AA Gill even though I find them unlikeable and disagree with them.

I dont enjoy Yasmin Ali Brown even though I empathise with her on many stances, same with Polly Toynbee. I enjoy Mathew Norman and Mark Steel, but not Paul Routledge.

I can't think of sa single Mail or Express writer worth bothering with.

I buy the Spectator regularly: and there's some good writing in it litttle of which I agree with thaat often: although I find Rod Liddle's laboured anti pc rantings dreary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's Carol Vorderman going to be wearing tomorrow? I don't think I can wait till the Mail comes out; the suspense is killing me. I'll pass the time by seeing what new stuff today's Express has dug up on Lady Diana.

;):biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's Carol Vorderman going to be wearing tomorrow? I don't think I can wait till the Mail comes out; the suspense is killing me. I'll pass the time by seeing what new stuff today's Express has dug up on Lady Diana.

;):biggrin:

What's Carol Vorderman going to be wearing tomorrow?

 

 

I am reliably informed that you'll need to continue looking at the Femail Today section of the on-line edition of The Mail to find out. 

 

 

You might prefer this section of The Guardian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I'll warn my mum.  :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

 

 

oh, and just found this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I'll warn my mum.  :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

 

 

oh, and just found this

 

 

You do realise that I can't stand her, don't you?

 

Not your Mum obviously, she's a little cracker.

;):biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, she'd have been  102  years old in December.  No, not Vorderman..although.....      :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows, York Minster was struck by lightning the day after David Jenkins (then Bishop of Durham) preached in it.

"Three days after his consecration as bishop on 6 July 1984, York Minster was struck by lightning, resulting in a disastrous fire which some interpreted as a sign of divine wrath at Jenkins's appointment"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Jenkins_(bishop)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an even more disgraceful example. Incredible though it may seem, the Mail reported that a "Labour Chancellor" claimed there would be "no return to boom and bust "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an even more disgraceful example. Incredible though it may seem, the Mail reported that a "Labour Chancellor" claimed there would be "no return to boom and bust "

Put another record on John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an even more disgraceful example. Incredible though it may seem, the Mail reported that a "Labour Chancellor" claimed there would be "no return to boom and bust "

 

I bet they also had that doozey about green shoots and recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put another record on John.

OK...like the one by " Jilted John"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet they also had that doozey about green shoots and recovery.

How could they? They only deal in falsehoods, according to some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need real press esp with this Harriet Harman and PIE thing ?

Is that the story about the Paedophile Information Exchange (at least I think that's what the group is called, my memory may have deserted me though)?  I read about that in The Sunday Times this morning, in a sarcastic ops piece making the (valid it would seem) comment that had it been Tories linked with a peodophile organisation the story would have been all over the BBC by now whereas the Beeb have not reported it at all.  I think another woman Labour MP plus a serving male Labour MP were also involved in some way and it all sounds very disturbing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that the story about the Paedophile Information Exchange (at least I think that's what the group is called, my memory may have deserted me though)? I read about that in The Sunday Times this morning, in a sarcastic ops piece making the (valid it would seem) comment that had it been Tories linked with a peodophile organisation the story would have been all over the BBC by now whereas the Beeb have not reported it at all. I think another woman Labour MP plus a serving male Labour MP were also involved in some way and it all sounds very disturbing.

your whole piece is either questions or supposition so what are you trying to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your whole piece is either questions or supposition so what are you trying to say?

There was only one question in it and I was asking it of the poster who first referred to PIE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, February 24, 2014 - No reason given

Whatever the  views of some on here about The Mail in general ( view which often hare) they do have some notable campaigning  successes.. This may well become one of them: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2566273/How-longer-paedophilia-apologists-stay-silent-Even-Left-demands-answers-senior-Labour-trio.html

Share this post


Link to post

Please do not discuss the allegations contained in this PIE subject any further here as TRL have made it abundantly clear that it's not a story that they want anything to do with due to it's serious libel potential.  Your posts will be deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do not discuss the allegations contained in this PIE subject any further here as TRL have made it abundantly clear that it's not a story that they want anything to do with due to it's serious libel potential.  Your posts will be deleted.

To publicly answer the two PMs I received on this:  If you wish to change that stance then you must contact John Drake.  He made this decision on behalf of TRL and it's not my place to overrule him.

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.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017