Topic: The Daily Mail

[RedBootsTommySmith]

Stupid pr!cks:

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/daily-mail-libels-united-passenger.html

Apparently, the Daily Telegraph ran the same story.

Dr.Dao's .  ..lawyer must think he's hit the lottery.

[Chakan]

Stupid pr!cks:

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/daily-mail-libels-united-passenger.html

Apparently, the Daily Telegraph ran the same story.

Dr.Dao's .  ..lawyer must think he's hit the lottery.

So not only going to be suing the airlines he's gonna settle with 2 newspaper. Bumper day for him.

Fucking idiotic rags.

[TheShanklyGates]

Absolutely fucking disgusting rag.

If there is a silver lining to all this for the poor bloke it's that he'll probably end up being able to retire off the settlements from the airline and the Heil.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I honestly can't get my head around how this is bad form.

We're talking about the Daily Mail here.

There are no depths that they and their readers wouldn't sink to.

[ShakaHislop]

Stupid pr!cks:

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/daily-mail-libels-united-passenger.html

Apparently, the Daily Telegraph ran the same story.

Dr.Dao's .  ..lawyer must think he's hit the lottery.

As the update to that blogpost says, it seems that the passenger on the plane is the same doctor who appeared in court after all.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-united-david-dao-20170412-story.html
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2017/04/12/yes-kentucky-doctor-david-dao-who-dragged-off-united-plane/100380420/

[M(oaning) B(ecomes) E(mbarrassing)]

I honestly can't get my head around how this is bad form.

We're talking about the Daily Mail here.

There are no depths that they and their readers wouldn't sink to.

The vermin of the earth.  As a way to 'keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer', I do look at their website to see the numbers of posts on specific stories to gauge their predictability.  If you don't want to unduly raise your blood pressure, then don't read their take on the Kelvin McKenzie story in today's Heil.  Although the 'paper' is being reasonably fair in the story itself, some of the contributors are actually defending the odious shack of sight (Sp) and lining up to agree with what he says about Liverpool and its people.  No surprise there but I do like to keep abreast on the level of animosity on certain articles to see which way the wind's blowing. 

[So… Howard Philips]

The vermin of the earth.  As a way to 'keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer', I do look at their website to see the numbers of posts on specific stories to gauge their predictability.  If you don't want to unduly raise your blood pressure, then don't read their take on the Kelvin McKenzie story in today's Heil.  Although the 'paper' is being reasonably fair in the story itself, some of the contributors are actually defending the odious shack of sight (Sp) and lining up to agree with what he says about Liverpool and its people.  No surprise there but I do like to keep abreast on the level of animosity on certain articles to see which way the wind's blowing.

I think it's best to follow your advice, not read the paper or its online version, and preserve your circulatory system.

The Mail, and to a lesser extent the Telegraph, publish articles which are journalistically balanced (within their political interpretation anyway) but the let the "contributors" do the dirty work.

[Butcher Knife Roberto]

I'm fascinated in finding out where on a journalism degree course they teach the bits about character assassination, homophobia and misogyny. Is it a 'day one' topic or a short course you can sign up to? I'm fairly certain that not all journos are bastards, so I'm interested in why people choose to go down that route, and how they can look at themselves in the mirror at night.

The Heil is right up there with the scum, but unlike that shit rag it appears more pre-occupied with sexual innuendo. Perhaps their contributors are lacking in a healthy sex life, who knows. I do find it strange though that they always seem to attach homosexuality to people who engage in seedy behaviour, yet they encourage their middle age and elderly readers to get their jollies at pictures of nipple slips and celebrities sunbathing topless in photos taken from half a mile away with a high zoom lens. Yeah, pictures of someone sunbathing is in the 'national interest'. The only thing that would be in the national interest would be to shut the fucking piece of shit bottom-feeding lowlife scumbags down. Like that prick K***** M*******, it belongs in the 70's with Carry On films and the casual sexism and racism. Dinosaurs.

But then it says a lot about our society that people still read that shit. Hugely depressing.

[So… Howard Philips]

I'm fascinated in finding out where on a journalism degree course they teach the bits about character assassination, homophobia and misogyny. Is it a 'day one' topic or a short course you can sign up to? I'm fairly certain that not all journos are bastards, so I'm interested in why people choose to go down that route, and how they can look at themselves in the mirror at night.

The Heil is right up there with the scum, but unlike that shit rag it appears more pre-occupied with sexual innuendo. Perhaps their contributors are lacking in a healthy sex life, who knows. I do find it strange though that they always seem to attach homosexuality to people who engage in seedy behaviour, yet they encourage their middle age and elderly readers to get their jollies at pictures of nipple slips and celebrities sunbathing topless in photos taken from half a mile away with a high zoom lens. Yeah, pictures of someone sunbathing is in the 'national interest'. The only thing that would be in the national interest would be to shut the fucking piece of shit bottom-feeding lowlife scumbags down. Like that prick K***** M*******, it belongs in the 70's with Carry On films and the casual sexism and racism. Dinosaurs.

But then it says a lot about our society that people still read that shit. Hugely depressing.

It's incredible the way the website has detailed stories of morally degenerate behaviour, preferably on a council estate but now and again some public school girl gone to the bad, when the side column has the said bikini'ed celebs flaunting themselves knowing the paparazzi our within telephoto lens range.

As you say an obsession with sex.

Needless to say I only go on the website just to be offended and report back here.

[cdav]

Their front page is in no way sinister tomorrow. Like we are now in a facist state, what with all these Sabateurs, Enemies of the People and Unpatriotic remainers- how do we as a country even begin to dial back the rhetoric with shit like this?

Is this the level a majority in this country has sunk to- less than a year after an MP (plus a mother, wife, charity worker and all round good human being) was murdered by a right wing terrorist in the street?

[rafathegaffa83]

That front page is shocking. Same with the one calling those judges enemies of the people.

[ShakaHislop]

Metropolitan elites dividing the country. When will Remoaners learn...oh.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Isn't the chairman of the mail a tax dodging unelected lord?

[cloggypop]

[Elisha S]

That front page is shocking.

[GreatEx]

Did they ever apologise or admit fault in supporting the Nazis? Serious question.

[Zeb]

Did they ever apologise or admit fault in supporting the Nazis? Serious question.

No. Although they also weren't the only British paper who backed fascists or pushed anti-semitism. But the Mail's fascist inclined owner died after WW2 started and the son didn't have quite the same lean towards fascism.

[Garrus]

That wouldn't be out of place in Star Wars, as a mouth piece for the Empire. Just Replace May's face with Palpatine's and "CRUSH THE REBELLION".

[viteslesrouges]

Metropolitan elites dividing the country. When will Remoaners learn...oh.

Shit, have I woken up in Turkey?

[killer-heels]

If I was the Daily Mail I would be less worried about the saboteurs and more worried about the government following Amber Rudd's comments yesterday. Its interesting how Hammond, Davis etc. wanted an election but the more rabid euro sceptic MP's didnt.

[KillieRed]

Lovely Paul Dacre. I heard about his Scottish Estate the other day;

"Who would have thought the self-appointed voice of “middle England” harboured such aristocratic fantasies as to acquire a mighty Scottish estate, complete with deer stalking, grouse shooting and salmon fishing? Imagine this champion of a fantasy “ordinary British family” in a pair of plus- fours or maybe a Prince Charles kilt, shotgun under arm. His monarch of the glen posturing reduces the ogre of Kensington High Street to a pleasing absurdity. To show he really has taken on authentic burdens of the landed gentry, the statement adds, “the business runs at a loss”. What’s more this is the second estate on which he claims subsidies: his Sussex arable and cattle farm is similarly blessed with CAP funds.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/31/paul-dacre-eu-subsidies-hypocrisy-daily-mail-euro-lies

I wonder what the Mail`s position is on Scottish Independence?  (It`s not too difficult to guess and is very much in line with many, many very rich individuals who have second homes/estates in Scotland). Don`t want that last bit of the empire slipping away...and they wonder why they are loathed.

I still can`t believe how many people read and believe this piece of shit, there`s more truth and entertainment in the National Enquirer.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Eighteen months ago I was a pro-European. Twelve months ago, I was a Remainer. Six months ago, I was a Remoaner.

Now, I am a Saboteur.

I wonder what penalties will be advocated for people with dissenting views by Christmas. Or as the Heil will no doubt characterise us: "Traitors".

[kennedy81]

Fucking hell that front page is beyond belief. And May looks quite psychotic too.
Calling people 'remoaners' is just juvenile but I suppose it panders to their feeble minded readers.

[ShakaHislop]

Fucking hell that front page is beyond belief. And May looks quite psychotic too.
Calling people 'remoaners' is just juvenile but I suppose it panders to their feeble minded readers.

I saw a Tory MP called Philip Hollobone use the term Remoaner with a serious face yesterday.

[SP]

The Daily Mail has a circulation of 1.4 million down from 2.1 million in 2010.

For reference 1.1m voted Green in 2015 despite them not contesting all seats and not having a chance in most of the ones they did fight. 3.9m voted UKIP.

Their reach is hugely overstated. Bastards being bastards springs to mind.  A progressive government does not need the support of the Mail. In fact, the shrieking harpy portrayal could well play really badly with the voters that are actually in play.




That graph looks better in situ.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2015/jun/08/newspaper-reader-election-ukip-express-sun-mail-telegraph

 

[cloggypop]

Transparency documents published by the Government last month revealed that May treated the right-wing newspaper’s notorious editor, Paul Dacre, to dinner at Number 10 on October 24, 2016.

May held meetings with other media outlets between October and December 2016 – but Dacre was the only person to be offered hospitality at Downing Street during those months.

Even the Archbishop of Canterbury and former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who she also met over that period, didn’t receive the same red carpet treatment.

A month before her soiree with Dacre at Number 10, May had dined with Daily Mail owner Viscount Rothermere and Mail on Sunday editor Geordie Greig. And May has hired former Daily Mail political editor James Slack as her official spokesman.


https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017/04/theresa-may-threw-a-dinner-party-for-the-daily-mail-editor-at-downing-street/#more-63140

[SP]

On a tangent, given the huge influence that papers claim, and their insistence that MPs offer full disclosure of their interests, is there not a powerful case that newspaper editors and anyone with a controlling ownership influence should have a similar register of interests?

It would be in the public interest.

[Haemoglobin]

Eighteen months ago I was a pro-European. Twelve months ago, I was a Remainer. Six months ago, I was a Remoaner.

Now, I am a Saboteur.

I wonder what penalties will be advocated for people with dissenting views by Christmas. Or as the Heil will no doubt characterise us: "Traitors".

Quite.

And millions in this country are just going along with it, be it blithely, or reluctantly, or obstinately ignorantly. And the referendum has undergone a creeping revision over that timespan, to the extent that it is now being considered an explicit call from the entire populace for a hard Brexit. This coming general election will be taken as unambiguously cementing the Tories' mandate for that hardest of all Brexits for the poor and burdened, despite there being several coincident complex factors in the 'opposition' being so muted and weak. Any dissent is currently already regarded as treachery; "undemocratic", "a betrayal of the will of the people". It's fucking Machiavellian politics 101, reminiscent of the populist rise of many authoritarian dictatorships and enduringly destructive government actions throughout history; self-inflicted national wounds that are not easily mended, or are actually irreversible.

And people wonder why some of us are getting so angry. Why it's not totally acceptable to casually characterise us as whinging 'Remoaners', you pack of fucking airheads and/or cunts. Have a little think for a moment about what we are desperately trying to protect here, what we all could be letting ourselves in for, for generations. Where are the checks and balances, what's going to guard us from the worst possible outcomes? Coming to our collective senses in years to come and then voting into office a much nicer government once the horse has bolted? Brilliant contingency plans, them - I'd compare that to bringing on a fresh attacking sub just in the very last seconds of added time in a European Cup final in which you needed a goal, except it's more like only considering it a fortnight later.

[Dowling10]

If I was the Daily Mail I would be less worried about the saboteurs and more worried about the government following Amber Rudd's comments yesterday. Its interesting how Hammond, Davis etc. wanted an election but the more rabid euro sceptic MP's didnt.

Dan Hodges said this. How though? I can only assume they have done some kind of analysis, and looking at the potential new seats taken from Labour will be more Moderate MPs and likely to be soft-Brexit?

[So… Howard Philips]

That front page is shocking. Same with the one calling those judges enemies of the people.

It's like something you would expect in North Korea from the state controlled press.

[Party Phil]

I'd compare that to bringing on a fresh attacking sub just in the very last seconds of added time in a European Cup final in which you needed a goal, except it's more like only considering it a fortnight later.

When you're already 3-0 down, your fans have left the stadium  and your captain has already gone off injured and been replaced by Ali Dia.

[Redman0151]

The Daily Mail has a circulation of 1.4 million down from 2.1 million in 2010.

For reference 1.1m voted Green in 2015 despite them not contesting all seats and not having a chance in most of the ones they did fight. 3.9m voted UKIP.

Their reach is hugely overstated. Bastards being bastards springs to mind.  A progressive government does not need the support of the Mail. In fact, the shrieking harpy portrayal could well play really badly with the voters that are actually in play.




That graph looks better in situ.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2015/jun/08/newspaper-reader-election-ukip-express-sun-mail-telegraph

 

Indeed, but the Daily Mail is the most read English speaking news website in the world. I'm not sure how much we can draw from paper sales anymore given the general shift towards digital readership.

Even if it's not directly reaching as many people as some claim, it's opinions and propaganda are perpetuated by readers and across the internet

[SP]

Indeed, but the Daily Mail is the most read English speaking news website in the world. I'm not sure how much we can draw from paper sales anymore given the general shift towards digital readership.

Even if it's not directly reaching as many people as some claim, it's opinions and propaganda are perpetuated by readers and across the internet

Is the Mail actually read? It is more glanced at. The online presence is heavily US skewed and focused on undressed celebrities.

[Kashinoda]

Indeed, but the Daily Mail is the most read English speaking news website in the world. I'm not sure how much we can draw from paper sales anymore given the general shift towards digital readership.

Even if it's not directly reaching as many people as some claim, it's opinions and propaganda are perpetuated by readers and across the internet

Is it?

It's not even top in the UK:
http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/GB

Though your point is correct, print media matters for shit. The major elections over the last couple of years have been massively influenced by online and social media.

[cloggypop]

Is it?

Supposedly, yeah.

http://www.thedrum.com/news/2016/05/13/daily-mail-video-content-helps-it-become-most-popular-english-language-site-world

[Redman0151]

Is it?

It's not even top in the UK:
http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/GB

Though your point is correct, print media matters for shit. The major elections over the last couple of years have been massively influenced by online and social media.

It's what I have read at least

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-daily-mail-most-popular-uk-newspaper-print-and-online-23m-readers-month/

And Comscore has it slightly ahead of NYT

http://www.comscore.com/Insights/Data-Mine/Most-Read-Online-Newspapers-in-the-World-Mail-Online-New-York-Times-and-The-Guardian

Is the Mail actually read? It is more glanced at. The online presence is heavily US skewed and focused on undressed celebrities.

Perhaps, I haven't seen any breakdown on the actual most viewed parts of their website, although I guess they'd rather keep it secret if more people read about Scarlett Johansson's sideboob than their refugee pieces

[thejbs]

The Daily Mail has a circulation of 1.4 million down from 2.1 million in 2010.

For reference 1.1m voted Green in 2015 despite them not contesting all seats and not having a chance in most of the ones they did fight. 3.9m voted UKIP.

Their reach is hugely overstated. Bastards being bastards springs to mind.  A progressive government does not need the support of the Mail. In fact, the shrieking harpy portrayal could well play really badly with the voters that are actually in play.

They get over 15m unique visitors to their site every day, not to mention facebook/twitter and other social media. 

Their reach and influence is very dangerous when you consider that many of those viewers will not look far beyond the headlines and sub-headlines.

[Kashinoda]

Yeah the Mail online has a lot more traffic from America

http://i.imgur.com/wXXJMot.png

Though so does the Guardian so there you go.

[Party Phil]

Oh, well if she was Muslim then I suppose it doesn't really count

[itsalltosh]

On the Left: Headline for this weeks Tory announcement for capping energy bills

On the Right: THe Headline when Ed Miliband proposed the same cap