Daily Mail to Buy Out The Telegraph?

And yes. They cant plan properly!
And need to know details.
But dont.
With any certainty whatsoever.

AI says

UK businesses have been affected by uncertainty budgets through dampened investment, delayed major decisions, and reduced consumer spending. Uncertainty from frequent policy changes and potential tax hikes is causing businesses, particularly SMEs, to hold back on hiring and capital expenditure, instead focusing on short-term measures like using temporary staff and building up cash reserves

fancythat

Just had a look at the i.

It is behind a paywall so could only see a few headlines.

The two I saw, looked right wing to me!

Echoed what I think about the budget flip flops being ridiculous.
Worse than that, it is individuals and businesses cant plan properly, as they dont know which way things are heading.
[I have been trying to write this in somewhere so here is good enough].

I don’t think I’d conclude on the basis of what you quote that the i is right wing, because it is stating the facts, individuals and businesses can’t plan until they know what the budget contains. I think they would say that before any landmark budget?

It just looked a bit right wing to me.

But as I said, it is behind a pay wall so I couldnt read much.

Seems more right wing than any ohter newspaper headline I can see online today. Apart from DM!

Lord Rothermere is the chair and controlling shareholder of Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT), a multi national media conglomerate. It includes Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, Ireland on Sunday, The I Paper and Metro newspapers in its stable. If the deal goes through and DMGT does acquire The Telegraph, it will result in less diversity and less competition in the UK media landscape. It will enlarge, embolden and consolidate the right and extreme right wing tilt of UK media representation,

Mediafactcheck.com measures the DM's performance as low factual reporting and towards extreme, right wing in its bias.

It is for each individual Gransnetter to consider whether this DMGT acquisition would be good for Britain, good for the balance of opinion and presentation, result in an overall low proportion of factual, unbiased reporting in the UK, good for competition and diversity and last but by no means least, whether it would be good for democracy,

LemonJam I am 100% that Lord Rothermere doesn’t give two hoots about what gransnetters think 🤷‍♀️

Better him than an Arab/USA buyout which thank goodness has fallen through.

We have the paper version of the Daily Mail.

Dr Scurr’’s medical advice is spot on, especially for oldies like us.
Max Pemberton psychologist excellent.
Sarah Vine top class award winning journalist
Jenni Murray stands up for the woke world we find ourselves in.

And of course very funny cartoons. 😀
The Daily Mail suits us.

GG13- I'm sure he doesn't!

Magenta8

Actually I did say it was trashy and bigoted.{confused}
Aapologies, its been a long day.

You got me confused there too Magenta!

Wyllow3

Yup. I live in an area where we have from the very rich indeed to the very deprived. That is all I meant, and no more.

I just happen to believe that ones incomes do actually make a difference to ones outlook - are you saying it doesnt?

Yes, true.

Traditionally working class people (like my father) voted Labour. That doesn't mean to say they are deprived , it meant they were not wealthy.

Are you now saying they would buy the Daily Mail which is right-wing?

Puzzling.

Of course, I suppose we're all middle class now.

We find The Times is reasonably centrist with different points of view aired. Unfortunately it got so expensive that we only bought it on a Saturday. Now my dh has it online as my dd has a subscription which allows her to share with a few other people. The Daily Mail is a lot more affordable which is why so many copies are sold. Wikapaedia doesn’t class it as a newspaper which says a lot about its value as a source of real news.

I live in a working class Northern town and the Daily Mail is the most popular newspaper. I buy the local paper, too, which is not biased. I prefer an actual physical paper and I use the paper to line my birds cages. I'm sure there are some petty little people who will say that is all it's good for.

My beef against the Guardian is not so much that it's far left but just that so often gets its facts wrong and ignores any attempt to point them in the right direction to carry out sound research.

The Financial Times has a well-balanced news section.
But you should read it online, as the print version is a real arm-stretcher.
(In my teens I took the advice from Miners' Union Leader, Joe Gormley - the moderate one before Arthur Scargill).

Yeh let’s just lap up what The Guardian and Mirror want us to know.

Merging of two mental asylums.

Junglebub

My beef against the Guardian is not so much that it's far left but just that so often gets its facts wrong and ignores any attempt to point them in the right direction to carry out sound research.

Yes, I've noticed lies being reported in The Guardian so they are not spotless!

Since The Guardian has been caught out publishing state secrets, too, perhaps the staff there consider themselves above the law?

All newspapers are biased to an extent and none is truly independent even if they do not support a political party.

The Guardian is no different to any other newspaper in reporting news inaccurately. It’s no worse, it’s down to journalists, and they all get it wrong sometimes. That’s why it’s important to read a wide variety of media, and to differentiate between opinion pieces and news reports.

A race to the bottom by right wing propaganda in print!

For Molly - and anyone else wanting a less opinionated paper - try the 'i', and you should find that it publishes differing views on a range of topics, helps readers look at the options to decide for themselves?

For all those thinking that the DT will soon resemble the Mail, please, apply some commonsense? WHY would anyone pay a huge sum of money, and a buy a well-established and popular brand, then make drastic changes and risk seeing sales plummet?? WHY?

The newspaper industry has been in a state of flux for 20+ years (see how the circulation figs have dropped like an anchor?) so why risk upsetting a very expensive applecart?

It does NOT remotely follow that the publishers are on a mission to convert reeaders to THEIR preferred political ethos, and for evidence, kindly check out Reach PLC, which owns the Mirror AND the Express, quite different beliefs.

They are well aware that changing the Mirror to be 'Express2', or vice-versa, would be self-defeating, the readers of both do NOT want alternative viewpoints, they buy those offerings because they know it gives them what they want. It would be like buying, say, the 'KerryGold' company (other butters are available) and changing the product to resemble cheap marg??

I gather from longterm readers that the DT is greatly admired for its sports pages, (I'm told by far the best for those who do not want to be bombarded with tabloid tripe about which footballer or mgr said what?), also its review columns and crossword.

Both rather nasty libellous rags, the Telegraph somewhat posher than the other!

keepingquiet

They are both sensationalistic rags- let them do what they want I for one couldn't care less.

The Daily Mail does have some sensible columnists though imo.

The Daily Mail must be doing something right. It has the largest sale of any other newspaper, whereas the Guardian is always asking for money.

windmill1

The news is this is a realistic possibility, but depends on various approvals.

Birds of a feather stick together, I suppose.

The Daily Torygraph & the Daily Fail. A marriage made in heaven. Two terrible rags that think Brittania still rules the waves.