A typical DM 'story'.

Ana, I will peruse the Express every day from now on.

That very rarely (if ever) happens, though, does it? (Apart from Bags's science articles, of course). I am always surprised at the incandescent rage the DM seems to generate among a lot of Gransnetters when The Express carries almost indentical stories. But as Greatnan doesn't even look at it because of who its owner is, it never gets a mention.

And as someone has already pointed out ana it does not position itself as a low rent, rubbishy gossip rag. It pretends to be a newspaper. So fair game I'd say. Nothing to stop a member starting a thread analysing an article in any other publication.

Of course not, kitty does't make it right though does it? There are too many of these non-news items being peddled and our intelligence is being seriously underestimated if not even eroded in the process. Give me The Economist any day.

Of course not, kitty, but it's an easy target, what with it being right-wing and all....

The DM does not have a monopoly on printing lies.

Fact 1) This is a non-story
Fact 2) it was lifted from another magazine possibly better known for "sleb "gossip than informed social comment (Closer, I believe)
Fact 3) it is getting people worked up whether violently for or against this young woman's use of her benefit money, hardly matters any more.
Fact4) it is an unfortunate reflection on a sector of society that "designer" clothes are seen to be something aspirational. (Although, secretly, I do wonder at which "designers" she has in mind, as what you and I might call "designers" are clearly beyond her reach even given the figures quoted)

Yes, we may think she should be using this money more sensibly, putting some aside for a rainy day if she really has it to spare, buying healthy food, taking her children to the seaside, whatever we feel is worthier. But she won't and neither will thousands of people whose priorities are not our priorities, whole values are not ours. Was this article meant to arouse anger or pity? I can feel both as I despair for the future of a generation who measure hapipness only in terms of glitzy clothes, smarter mobiles and 21st century gee-gaws.

Well I may be mistaken but I always thought women sometimes get pregnant by accident.

Then they have three alternatives don't they?

Anyway, why all this acrimony towards this type of person and no mention of the very wealthy freeloaders in our society (Royalty, inherited wealth, tax avoiding, fiddled expenses etc)?

Lastly if getting pregnant and living on benefits is such a good deal, well, those who think so are free to do it themselves (if they are women)

If it's such a tough life bringing up children alone funded by the tax payer then don't do it. Get a job and contribute to society instead.

The Daily Mail picked up the story from another publication. There is no wonder that people who struggle to work day in and out get angry.

I wonder if those people who think getting pregnant and living on benefits is a cushy number have ever tried looking after a baby (or several children) by themselves, and on a very limited income.

I have personal experience of the DM distorting information to suit their agenda. Like with Jess's OH they went ahead and published lies despite being contacted with the facts, which didn't suit their stance on the story. This young woman has spoken about what she wants to do as a 20 year old, not what she has done. They've put spin on a non-story as usual.

Getting back to basics, the DM journalists and others interview people and then print a selected and distorted version of the conversation, which suits their paper's agenda. So someone interviews a young woman who may or may not be telling the complete truth about her circumstances. Closer then publishes their own take on this and the DM pick it up. Not good journalism and no reason why we should believe any of the "facts" printed.
I have posted before on another thread, so sorry if I am boring any of you:
I was once standing next to DH when a Mail on Sunday journalist rang him to "check a fact" about a shock horror story they were running the following day "XXX will be a burglers charter". DH explained the facts and said at the end of the conversation "Well if that is what you are intending to print, it will be a lie". And of course they printed their lies as there would have been no "story" if they had printed the facts and there was a powerful group in the background pushing for bad press on the issue.
On another occasion the school where I was chair of governors was in the local news about our attempts to reduce teenage pregnancies which had been high. Cue journalists (if not from Closer it was something similar) to harass the school staff and kids at the school gate, tour the estate trying to interview 14 year olds in the street about their sex lives. Result, nasty story about the area being the teenage pregnancy capital of europe or some such rubbish.
The DM story is almost certainly a distorted version of an original interview. The quality of the information gathering in the interview is unlikely to have been rigorous. There is no point in giving it any credence or even debating the "facts" contained in this story. It will unverified hearsay, mixed with fiction.

I wasn't going to bother with this thread but as it goes on I will put my 2 penneth in.

Greatnan you clearly meant to raise 2 issues with this thread. By heading it a 'Typical D.M. 'Story', asking what was the motivation for them running the story and saying they found somebody to tick all the boxes, an unemployed, non white,single mother living on benefits, you were clearly tantamount to inferring bigotry from the D.M.

The second point you raised was the fact you didn't agree with financial aspects stated in the article. At one point in the thread you accused the mother of lying.

Surely, as the D.M. clearly states the article was taken from 'The Closer Magazine' would it not be that magazine you would take to task, unless ofcourse the article was not the core issue for the thread.

Do people really think that every word is only written by the journalists belonging to that paper. Ofcourse not, they all 'lift' stories from others. If they didn't every article would be an exclusive.

Nellie

You mentioned the word 'spinning'. When you mentioned the D.M. printed a headline '£93,000,00, the price of piece of mind'. it gave the impression that was what the D.M. thought we need financially. It was a poll carried out by Legal and General Insurance, asking people in various parts of Britain 'How much would you need to feel safe and comfortable'. Therefore I question why you thought it was worthy of mention. It could easily have been a report in any paper and probably will be.

Sel

You raised perfectly good questions and made reasonable comments.

whoa..surely this issue is the amount this girl is being given from the taxpayer...i have no way of knowing if the amounts reported are true. Greatnan says they aren't based on the fact it's reported by the DM. I'd just like some sort of clarity here.

Anno you just made what was to be my next post.

My rant post was about the poor quality of the DMs journalism as an example of the tabloids, not specifically about its political stance. Although my views on that are probably very apparent.

Sel what I suggest Greatnan might have meant by your quote "Greatnan do you know the facts simply don't add up?" is that.
The DM headline and the actual article underneath that headline contradict each other. The article said the girl PLANS to buy 20 presents.
The headline said she had bought them. There is a big difference there. It seems The DM itself couldn't get the facts right. More crap journalism.

Greatnan forgive me if I haven't got that right.
Sel See my original post on this.

What I am really saying is, don't use this one case to condemn all single mothers on benefits.

We're losing the plot here. Anno much as it may pain you, read the report. This 20 year old girl is telling everyone, way to go..forget school, forget anything else, just get pregnant. I'm waiting for Greatnan to prove this is wrong.

Single mothers of young children are in a difficult position. They are damned if they do work and damned if they don't. The truth is that if a young woman in this situation gets a job, she then has the issue of child care. Not all of them have the luxury of a nearby gran. Availability of child care varies hugely from one area to another and all-day care can be expensive. It's quite possible that she would be better off staying at home with her children at least until they go to school. The children would surely benefit from having their mum around. Once they are at school, there is the worry about how to manage during the school holidays.

Great london when I first learned to drive I made an announcement, I would 'go to church' under my own steam. I used to go and buy a copy of the NOW - it was banned in our house - and I would sit and read it and then drive back home and attempt to discuss the gospel. happy days

sel the paper i read was the news of the world

I see I posted [grim][grim] in relation to the london housing market, a freudian slip...

For london smiley face and a wink !!

london I am laughing...go on then
what do you think? Your input would be valuable, but you do have to temper that with knowledge of the london housing market!! [grim][fgrim]

sel i can not resist lurking on post when i see your name .a no i dont comment on any ,but you make me

Greatnan what words did I put into your mouth?

The thing that annoys me about the DM is that they have all the big Shock,Horror, headlines but they never seem to follow any of them up. After this article there should surely be another one in January to find out exactly she was able to buy for Christmas and how much she spent. As it is she will just go down in everyone's memory as that woman who was getting all that money.

I always read the I now. For a start it is so cheap, and it has such a broad spectrum of political views. I may violently disagree with some of the contributors, but it is always interesting to read what they say and try to understand why they say it.