The Daily Mail - the great divide

Fallingstar

I tend to think that the DM is driven more by opinions than facts. Other papers may have a bias but I think do try to present the facts.
Doesn’t Boris write for them, or did. And I think Katie Hopkins once wrote for them.
That would be a big red flag for me.

Ugh! Utterly vile woman!

The Daily Mail has an Australian edition so nanna8 can judge for herself.

www.dailymail.com/auhome/index.html

eazybee

I would say Nanna8 has a better grasp on politics than some posters on here, and having seen many derogatory quotes about a British newspaper is curious to learn more about it.

The Daily Mail was founded in 1896 and is a newspaper of longstanding, originally a broadsheet,now tabloid. It is described as being middle-market conservative (with a small'c') and right-wing leaning from the days when that wasn't a term of abuse.
It is a popular put-down to describe opinions as 'Daily Mail speak', usually from Guardian readers who then have to admit that they read the DM on line, just to see it is saying, so they can abuse it.
There appears to be a tremendous amount of snobbery attached to newspapers here. At one time libraries, schools, colleges, hotels, waiting rooms used to provide a range of newspapers, and it was interesting to compare the different takes on headlines, but since they have become so expensive they have become fewer and fewer.
I hate to be without my daily newspaper, which I read on line, but I enjoy seeing different presentations of the same stories and particularly enjoy What The Papers Say type programmes comparing different articles.
But the condemnation of the Daily Mail on here is not as widespread in the country as a whole as you would think from the comments on here.
What is sad is that newspaper reading is declining as more people seem to get their news (if at all) from their phone and some rather strange websites. Reading a range of articles can help you clarify your opinion, for or against, whereas headlines and leading paragraphs give you the briefest of facts because they are designed to be attention grabbing.

I think it’s good to get news from
various sources, as I said don’t subscribe to the DM politics, but I’ve been known to read articles by them, likewise the Telegraph.

Sago

The Daily Mail has an Australian edition so nanna8 can judge for herself.

www.dailymail.com/auhome/index.html

Yes, I'd forgotten about the Australian section! Do tell us what you think nanna8 although many of the stories which pop up are international and the 'ribbon of shame' on the right is pure celebrity gossip and women in bikinis.
PS: sorry if you get hooked, it can have that effect. 😂

foxie48

Luckygirl3

foxie48

I certainly don't think Daily Mail readers are contemptible, just poorly informed.

The concern for me is the way in which they are informed by the DM.

Exactly, distorted, selective and sometimes completely incorrect headlines or opinions disguised as facts. Do other newspapers do this? Yes but, IMO, nowhere near as blatantly as the DM.

The divisive nature of their output is dangerous and vile.

Surely in this day and age even if you do read the DM it can’t be the only news you are receiving with 24 hour news and online papers.

BlessedArt

I don’t think I’d dirty the bottom of my shoes by wiping them with the DM. It’s a vile rag which displays a strong contempt for truth. It doesn’t even pretend to have integrity, and so it is insulting to journalism to call those who “write” for it journalists.

Oh dear, you really haven't read this thread, have you. 🤦‍♀️

Thank for the link * Sago* will check it out ( so long as it’s free, not paying for it!)

Just looked at the Aussie version- not too bad,better than I thought it would be. Not a lot of political content so probably they keep off that. Like most of us here 😀. Australian politics are pretty boring really, no one gets aerated about much really.

BlessedArt

I don’t think I’d dirty the bottom of my shoes by wiping them with the DM. It’s a vile rag which displays a strong contempt for truth. It doesn’t even pretend to have integrity, and so it is insulting to journalism to call those who “write” for it journalists.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

I think that it is unquestionable that the DM is unreliable and untrustworthy regarding truth and facts.

It prioritises sensationalism and outrage over absolute accuracy.

That is why it would not be sensible to only read this for news and information.

Read it for inaccurate gossip and hyperbole by all means, if that floats your boat, but do not think that you are getting an accurate picture.

I said what I said. The DM is a low level rag. Reading the thread will not make the DM respectable. Anyone who confidently reads it and sees “truth” has no reason to lecture anyone on blindness.

BlessedArt

I said what I said. The DM is a low level rag. Reading the thread will not make the DM respectable. Anyone who confidently reads it and sees “truth” has no reason to lecture anyone on blindness.

Hi up there!

Just wondering how often The Mail has been forced to publish explicit retractions or admissions of misleading reporting?

No moral high ground needed. Being offended that others refuse to give views to salacious, blatantly biased, Murdoch gossip rags is not my problem to solve. At least be secure in your choices

BlessedArt

No moral high ground needed. Being offended that others refuse to give views to salacious, blatantly biased, Murdoch gossip rags is not my problem to solve. At least be secure in your choices

Murdoch does not own the Daily Mail.

Really? When did they sell?

When did who sell?

Murdoch has never owned the Daily Mail or its sister publications.

Ps do you read The Times or Sunday Times?

JenniRen

When did who sell?

Murdoch has never owned the Daily Mail or its sister publications.

You’re right. I forgot it’s one of Murdoch’s rivals for right-winged attention. It’s actually worse than most of his publications.

I've not read it because I thought it was behind a paywall but perhaps that's the Telegraph.

Yes, I occasionally look up something in The Mail. Likewise the Guardian. I'm very well-balanced! Or indecisive.

JenniRen

I've not read it because I thought it was behind a paywall but perhaps that's the Telegraph.

Yes, I occasionally look up something in The Mail. Likewise the Guardian. I'm very well-balanced! Or indecisive.

I think well balanced is a more apt description.

I stopped reading much in the DM when it appeared to make it their mission to demonise people on benefits and single Mums.

I was a single Mum at the time, though working with a mortgage.

My dear late mother was also a single mum for a period of time due to the suicide of my biological father.

Demonizing single mums and other women. But hey, apparently it’s all feminist now. A feminist, right-winged tabloid. A new creature of a publication entirely!

I expect a newspaper to publish the truth and all I know about the Daily Mail is that nothing in it can be trusted.

I know imagine being right wing - how awful. We used to manage in this society to understand the need for the right wing and the left wing. The progressives struggle with that these days.