Daily Mail obsession!

Very well put BAnanas

Let's have a quiet, refined, revolution...

But I'm sure you will, Greatnan.

Good heavens, do I really strike you as so simplistic and naive, movedalot? The causes of the global recession are manifold and complex and I cannot possibly give you a short answer. I could cite the running down of the manufacturing base, the rise of the Far East economies, the over optimism of many of the market-makers but I am afraid I would bore you all rigid and you can consult people who are much more knowledgeable than I am.
I would like to see the greedy bankers punished, partly in the interests of justice and partly 'pour decourager les autres'.
I don't think I need to comment any further on the demonisation of benefit claimants by the Daily Mail and others.

Paul Abbott, the BAFTA winning author of "State of Play" also wrote "Shameless". I have read several interviews with him in which he has described a tough and deprived upbringing which he has on occasions drawn on to script the latter.

Possibly The DM did seek to vilify a certain strata of society in their article of yesterday, but if they hadn't couched this article in the way they did, I think the public would still be aware that people like Michael Philipott exist to exploit the benefit system. That's not to say that their readers can't distinguish between a few individuals like him and the vast majority of benefit claimants who clearly are not like this.

However, I rather suspect the Jeremy Kyle type of show does much more damage in presenting an image of a certain demographic as disfunctional and shameless than the DM ever could. This type of TV is akin to bear baiting and I wonder what purpose it serves other than to make the audience feel morally superior. I think we would be better off without it, but I think quite possibly the people that make up the audiences for this type of show are not the sort of people to be reading the "proper newspapers" that one GN referred to or the even the DM rag for that matter!

I read the "rag" on line, I read the Independent on line, we buy the Times, we buy the Sunday Times, my youngest son who lives with us sometimes buys the Guardian, my older son who used to live with us occasionally bought the Sun. If we are travelling up to London we usually pick up the London Evening Standard. I like to read a range of opinions, sometimes I want to read something serious and sometimes I just want to read sheer drivel. That's my prerogative as an adult. I don't feel I have to justify myself. I don't particularly want to read the diatribes from the "bien pensant" of say socialist Polly Toynbee who sent one of her offspring to Bedales as I can't take that type of person very seriously.

I don't need a lecture on my reading matter I left school a good few years back now!

Greatnan may I suggest that Ana has taken your so frequently made point about the bankers to mean that you feel everything would be OK if they were punished? You do rather often mention them that it would be easy to think you hold them responsible for so many of the issues we, in the UK, have.

The other thing you keep saying which puzzles me is: "people make out and demonising all benefit claimants" as I don't understand who you think it doing this. Is it just the DM or is it more than that? I don't read the DM so don't know but I haven't seen anyone on here doing it.

I am not sure what you are asking me, Ana. I am not angry about the out-of-control benefit system. I wish nobody was dishonest, but that is not human nature, and I don't know that people at the bottom of the pecking order are any more dishonest than those at the top. I didn't realise it was a contest.
The bankers have brought misery and ruin to thousands of people - I don't think even the most die-hard right winger would accuse benefit cheats of that.
Do I have to keep on repeating that I do not condone cheating - I just think the loss to the exchequer is not as great as some people make out and demonising all benefit claimants is unjust and a distraction from the real problems..

Of course, the Mail did a good job in pursuing the scum who murdered Stephen Lawrence and it has some very good journalists. It does fill up lots of space with totally irrelevant photos of court houses or hospitals.

Greatnan, if by some miracle all the villainous bankers were brought to justice and made to repay millions to replenish the UK's coffers, and by another miracle the UK became solvent again, do you believe the press would stop targeting the above-mentioned scapegoats? It isn’t just our dire economic situation that makes people angry about the out-of-control benefits system.

The Mail does knowingly print lies in the interests of sensationalism and promoting certain political agendas. I'm sure lots of publications do this but I have first hand experience of the Mail doing just that.

I am afraid there is not much to be said about the integrity of any of the newspapers - many are owned by tax exiles or pornographers. The only reason I appear to have an obsession with the Daily Mail is that I abhor the way it pretends to be shocked about moral values and then loses no opportunity to print salacious stories and photos of half naked 'celebs'.I can't bear hypocrisy.
Of course, it is not alone in demonising the poor, single mothers, immigrants (a speciality of the Express) and the unemployed as most right wing papers do the same.
When things are tough, people look for scapegoats - unfortunately, the real villains of the piece, the bankers, appear to be escaping unscathed.

I abhor the politics of the Daily Mail but have to admit that the online version is very successful, and tempting, and I visit it most days - of course this adds to their coffers as it raises advertising revenue.

The articles are 'click bait' designed to bring maximum reaction from readers.

From the odious A.N. Wilson to Samantha Brick and Liz Jones - it's mainly about money, not just spreading political propaganda.

So if you really don't support Paul Dacre, and the Rothermere family, don't go on the Daily Mail website.

As for the Indie - I gave that a wide berth when it was bought by a former KGB agent, a friend of Putin. How can this paper be taken seriously?

Jane - love your comment re Shipman.

Actually, there are certain issues where I am very confident in claiming the high moral ground - Forced Marriages /FGM WRONG IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES will do for starters. Child abuse, wife battering. That the DM article on Philpott was gutter press at its lowest will do for another. That Jeremy Kyle and Ann W were wrong to do TV programmes on him and his families is another - sod moral relativism - there are many issues where I know I am right.

Nor could I Ana

Thanks for that, Sel - couldn't stop laughing!

I have a present for you Bluebell

www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

An awful lot of moral high ground being claimed, that's for sure - j0

j08

Capital punishment is forbidden in the UK as long as we remain party to the European Convention on Human Rights, and my view is that any state that is prepared to kill convicted killers is hypocritical and barbaric. British Crime Surveys, conducted on behalf of the Home Office, consistently find that the majority of adults surveyed are in favour of bringing back capital punishment for offences like murder and sexual abuse of children - not necessarily hanging, but other methods.

Would you really want to find "superior people" on here? It's bad enough with the ones who think they are

Sorry, Mice - my post was in reply to Greatnan's, of course.

Yes - except that most of those who do would be very reluctant to face the opprobrium of those who don't, and the vote would, I suspect, be very one-sided.

Well, I've been looking for superior people on this forum, but I haven't found any. Plenty with strong views though, sometimes backed up with reliable evidence and sometimes supposition and surmise.

As for the DM. I read it on line, in addition to most of the other press, and I can see why it's popular. It has a wide range of stories, the photography is excellent, and it it cleverly written. Just occasionally, it takes up worthwhile issues and does a good job. Sadly, it is very selective about what it chooses to highlight and what it chooses to omit, and its headlines are frequently very slanted so that even if the content of the text beneath is accurate, the reader has already been persuaded into a certain position.

And the final comment on Movedalot's last post is probably best ignored, but the tone reminds of certain texts read elsewhere.

O.K. For the sake of peace, let us accept that most people in the UK do not want to bring back capital punishment and every survey that reported the opposite was flawed.
It would be quite interesting to do a survey of GN members!