to want HATE campaigns against foreigners in the popular Press to stop...

Daily Mail, right up to 1933:

"I urge all British young men and women to study closely the progress of the Nazi regime in Germany. They must not be misled by the misrepresentations of its opponents. The most spiteful distracters of the Nazis are to be found in precisely the same sections of the British public and press as are most vehement in their praises of the Soviet regime in Russia. They have started a clamorous campaign of denunciation against what they call "Nazi atrocities" which, as anyone who visits Germany quickly discovers for himself, consists merely of a few isolated acts of violence such as are inevitable among a nation half as big again as ours, but which have been generalized, multiplied and exaggerated to give the impression that Nazi rule is a bloodthirsty tyranny."

Perhaps you ought to read this article from the sainted Guardian, granjura, before you get too carried away...

www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2011/dec/06/dailymail-oswald-mosley

What the hell is a"flirtation with fascism"? Of course one should allow that a paper may change over time and may develop different views, the trouble is that the DM hasn't. It's still using the same prejudiced views.

I did Ana - which is why I introduced my comment in line with it.

Sometimes I do wonder if you actually read the posts before replying ?

Yes, I read the posts, granjura. If you agree with the article, and especially its conclusion, why bring the subject up at all?

One of the things that always makes me furious is the knee-jerk stupidity of saying that the Daily Mail used to support fascism, thereby implying that it is somehow tainted goods in its modern form.

You say a newspaper today should not be judged for what it supported in the past - but then go ahead and do it anyway!

It perhaps indicates the little respect (if any) I have for someone who constantly adds to their post the idea that they are in some way better than the rest of us
I never said that I was better than anyone else, but I do think there are a lot of people out there in the world, better than me, full of compassion and love for their fellow human beings. In contrast, I find that some of the self-congratulatory posts on some threads from people who claim to be 'pacifists' and accuse other people of being 'fascists' come across as belligerent, aggressive, accusatory and totally different to the views of people I know who work for a better world.


And I don't really care whether or not you respect me or not trisher.

It could also be argued that it's everyone's duty to read all the trashy tabloids
TriciaF - what - every day?!!

I made it clear that

a/ a paper should NOT be judged for past opinions, attitudes

b/ that I used an 'example'

I am sorry you can't see the difference.

Trisher's reply at 16.40.58 - explains why very well - because it has not changed.

Well, if you say so - I suppose the Mirror is still the same as well, is it? Despite being a Labour rag?

Yes, I did say so, clearly, I do wonder if you actually read the article yourself? It concludes:

The point is: damn the Mail if you will for what it publishes now.

Which was the point indeed.

Please finish the quote Jalima if you want to use my words

because they care about refugees and Aleppo

And you haven't said why you feel the need to constantly post about these things.
I too would like to see a better world and part of that involves condemning behaviour which results in some people being mistreated and castigated because of their race, belief or country of origin. Part of being compassionate is putting yourself in the position of those who are targeted, whether it be in this country or elsewhere. It isn't much use feeling sorry for people in Aleppo when your neighbour is being threatened and abused.

Of course I read the bloody article - do stop being so sneering.

So the only point you were making is that you damn the Mail for what it publshes now. Well, we knew that! Why rake up the past?

That's what the Guardian article is saying, and I agree with it.

^It perhaps indicates the little respect (if any) I have for someone who constantly adds to their post the idea that they are in some way better than the rest of us because they care about refugees and Aleppo.

so sorry, I will remember in future if I ever want to repeat your words.

And you haven't said why you feel the need to constantly post about these things.
Constantly post?

Constantly:
continuously over a period of time;
Really??

So - what do you want to do trisher?
Shall we go and picket the offices of newspapers you dislike?

Any ideas?

all this 'damning' of newspapers and what people read or don't read is beyond absurd, and yes, it's arrogant too.Put a sock in it.

I realla don't think it is either absurd, or arrogant- to say that if you choose to give your money, day in, day out- to a paper owner and its staff- that peddles racism and intolerance. At some point, you endorse what they say with your custom - and it does make you (one) complicit.

You wouldn't bother to buy it otherwise.

Clear- as a bell.

But - how do people who say certain papers peddle racism and intolerance know what is in them - if they are so disgusted by these papers they would not read them, surely?

Just puzzled really

And I don't think that Stephen Lawrence's parents would necessarily agree either:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2570722/Daily-Mail-page-turning-point-says-mother-Stephen-Lawrence.html

BUT IT'S ON THE FRONT PAGE!!!YOU DON'T HAVE TO OPEN THEM UP AND READ THEM. Why are you defending them? I don't understand. What is so good about newspapers printing blatant lies??

Granjura Below is part of the first para of my last post on this subject

I happily admit to reading the Daily Mail and the i, oh, and the Observer and Daily Telegraph at weekends. Some days I read the Guardian instead or as well.

With what am I complicit?

Thank you jalima for reminding 'some' people how instrumental the DM were in putting some of the pond life who committed that awful murder behind bars.

How can you say that they print "blatant lies" Tegan , when they ARE using their phones?

I've been talking about their headlines in general Ceesnan,not the phone one. Apologies for misleading you.

Ah, I see! So they do get things right sometimes then. As Jalima said, they were instrumental in the search for justice for Stephen Lawrence.

So one exceptional act excuses everything else- surely not. Or perhaps it's true, after all Mussolini made the trains run on time, or so they say.