Daily Mail

Why should anyone be asked to justify why they read a certain newspaper? I dislike assumptions. If I were to say that I assumed all black men were drug dealers, all gay males were peadophiles, all Muslims were terrorists and all Asian men raped underage girls, I would quite rightly be taken to task by GNs, however it appears to be OK to assume that because someone reads the DM they are uneducated, knuckle dragging, racist morons.

Oldwoman70

whereas Guardian readers are all educated, reasonable, kind and compassionate.
Where does that leave some of us who may read any newspaper that is to hand?
Confused? or thinking for themselves?
(Apart from The Sun)

varian will anyone listen to him?

Incidentally Vince Cable writes for the Mail on Sunday.

The Mail on Sunday has a different editor and takes an different political stance from the DM.

I think it is wrong to suggest that all readers of any newspaper share the same characteristics and I've not noticed anyone suggesting that.

However it was found that regular readers of certain papers were very likely to vote the same way in the EU referendum. Guardian readers tended to vote Remain. Readers of The Express, DM and Sun were most inclined to vote Leave.

It is therefore important to try to understand why people choose to read one newspaper rather than another.

The Daily Mail and The Sun have the biggest readership of all national newspapers and so it matters how they influence their readers.

Tony Blair realised he needed to court Rupert Murdoch and get The Sun on side if he was ever to win a general election.

Theresa May is very close to Paul Dacre, who has been the DM editor for 25 years. He is one of the most powerful figures in UK media and has used his influence to push for Brexit and a reduction in immigration. The Daily Mail has been a staunch supporter of May and Dacre was the only media figure to be privately dined by No 10 during her first six months in office.

"If I were to say that I assumed all black men were drug dealers, all gay males were peadophiles, all Muslims were terrorists and all Asian men raped underage girls, I would quite rightly be taken to task by GNs, however it appears to be OK to assume that because someone reads the DM they are uneducated, knuckle dragging, racist morons."

Spot on. Well said Oldwoman70 I completely agree.

However, if we all had a pound for every time a left winger spat "Daily Mail reader" as a term of abuse, we'd be very rich people. I wish they could find a new sneer as they malign so many compassionate and caring people who want a small paper to read which isn't a red top.

Millions of people buy papers and don't give a thought about the political affinity of the rag. People are more likely to be swayed by social media these days and political bias there is very much more evident.

If we talk about a divided nation, that is where it's coming from - clear lines of division regarding political alliance spewed out in vast swathes of screen and column inches every single day by keyboard warriors - like ourselves. TM only has to cough and it's reported. If Barnier grimaces it's the end of the world. If Nicola Sturgeon squints she is planning world domination. It's all becoming quite ridiculous and fake news abounds and worms its way into gullible minds. Those in the public eye, including politicians, are hounded, misrepresented and bitched about and I don't envy them one little bit.

Interesting post Day6

Are you saying the great divide is between the charicature "Daily Mail reader" and "Guardian reader" or between folk like us who are interested in politics and most folk who are not?

Further to my post upthread, and if anyone is interested, I also read the Guardian at DD'S house! It's no wonder I'm often confused!!

Are you saying the great divide is between the charicature "Daily Mail reader" and "Guardian reader"
I'm not saying it but it does seem to be the general consensus on GN

me too kitty!
Brain goes off in all directions, even in the middle of the night.

Well Varian, I buy the Guardian sometimes, and sometimes the Telegraph, and I read some right wing publications online occasionally (and left wing ones) and I like to think that having a variety of perspectives makes me think about things more. The joys of the internet!

However, there seems to be no middle ground on line as far as social comment is concerned. There are two warring factions - left and right and very little middle or neutral ground. The Independent claimed that but sold out years ago, sadly.

And yes, there are those who are interested in the news and politics and those that don't dwell on events and shun political discussion (quite rightly I think, for peace of mind!) because yesterday's newspapers are in the recycling and there is something new to concentrate on today.

I am not sure we influence much by bickering on-line and I always feel better when I stay away from commenting on the News and Politics forum for a few days. However, go to any site which has a comments section and most who comment seem to get very heated and passionate about their left or right wing stance. I'd like to think common sense would prevail and that there is a middle ground but right wingers are portrayed as selfish, wealthy and uncaring, or racist and stupid, and left wingers as denim-knitting, squat-dwelling communist students or middle class virtue signallers who patronise the poor because it's the right thing to do.

Slap bang in the middle is a huge swathe of people who look out for their families, care about others less fortunate, work hard, do their best and want the NHS to survive! I wish the political parties could find some common middle ground because the growing divide between left and right, fuelled by keyboard warriors after Brexit and the last election is getting silly.

PS: I agree with Corbyn about the railways.
PPS: Who admires Richard Branson? The left or the right? Or no one?

Succinctly put Day6, you've summed it up rather well.

Yes Day6 slap bang in the middle are folk like me who believe in co-operation rather than confrontation, but when we tried it for real (Con-LibDem coalition) we got attacked by all sides.

Sadly it seems there are too many vested interests for co-operation to work in this country.

Indeed- and it is a really a particular UK problem which is the result of the FPP system - which results in this massively damaging see-sawing ult right, ult left - on and on

Virgin Trains West Coast line will no longer sell the Daily Mail which it regards as "no longer compatable with VT brand and beliefs".
Rather a stupid thing to do though, don't you think?
Virgin Trains West Coast line doesn't sell the Guardian either, which, like the Daily Mail, has highly criticised Virgin Trains.

All they had to say was 'there isn't enough demand/it is not worth our while' or some such excuse.

It is not up to any train company, which has been criticised extensively for their poor customer service, not least on here, to become censors.
Don't sell any newspapers at all on Virgin trains.

You don't need to worry Jalima, Corbyn has given his assurance that, when he renationalises the trains, he "will let trains sell the Daily Mail". Whether they want to or not, who knows. So that's a comfort, isn't it?

MaizieD, Yes I know the MoS has a different editor, but given that one of its main columnists is Hitchens, who is not known for his liberal views, I debate how much different its political stance is to the DM.

Day6, that was my point, but you put it so much more eloquently than I did! I object to being defined by the newspaper I read ... I am not ill-educated, have a degree (in Social Sciences, which according to the DM is a "Mickey Mouse" degree) and am a paid up member of the LibDems. I read the Mail because I want to, it's a tabloid without being a 'comic' (Yes, I know that's arguable, but what I mean is that it does have some lengthy educated articles) like some others (The Sun etc).
I actually like taking issue with some of its coverage, but then I enjoy a good argument!!

The problem is that some people are really taken in by what they read. Especially when there is a constant campaign of rubbishing a certain sector of the population e.g. teachers social workers immigrants the E.U.

I debate how much different its political stance is to the DM
I think DM was for Brexit and MOS was for Remain so quite a difference stance on the referendum.

Sunday papers are different beasts to the Dailies.

There are always going to be 'some people' in any area of life. Its not for a train company to censor those people: one of the joys of living in western society is that we have free access to information. What we make of it is our own concern, not Virgin Media's.