I'm not sure I buy into this argument of The Guardian = virtuous as opposed to The Mail =The Great Satan of journalism. Lets face it most of us get on to the Mail on line, because like The Guardian it's not behind a pay wall and I'm with Monica, it's good to read across the spectrum one has to employ a certain amount of cynicism with journalism as to how matters are skewed and the terms they're couched in. These days we only buy the ST, I subscribe to The Independent on line and my husband will occasionally pick up The I during the week. Going back to the Mail on line, indeed some of it is absolute scurrilous drivel, for God's sake any discerning person would know that when they get it up on line what to expect, daily bulletins on The Beckhams, Harry and Meghan, Katie Price, mostly it's collusion by both parties, there are those who want their profile up there. Plus there's also load of non entities who even I, who try to keep up with popular culture to an extent, you never know what might come up in a pub quiz 
has no clue whatsoever who Olivia Attwood is for example, she pops up regularly and apparently she's hard launching her latest flame, whatever that means, some geezer called Pete Wicks. Why we need to know this God only knows. It's the stuff of Heat type magazines, not a newspaper 
At times there is some serious journalism. For example off the top of my head, a double page spread on the exploitation as to the damaging effects on Congolese children mining for cobalt. The political narrative in that paper will not be liked by those who avidly read The Guardian, possibly the highlighting of sexual assaults by asylum seekers is a constant in the Mail, whereas The Guardian will only report such happenings when they go to trial and sentencing. The Guardian is not everyone's bible, it's alienated a whole swathe of women on the transgender debate, look no further than MN I've read it time and time again over there, "I used to buy that paper, but no longer" Lets not forget they lost two of their women journalists, namely, Suzanne Moore and more latterly Hadley Freeman who now writes for the ST who made no secret of the fact that their support for Owen Jones's stance on the matter trounced any other pov. Like many media outlets there have been historical discrepancies in the gender pay gap. Added to which when the argument of unpaid internships was in the news a few years ago they were one of the many, who may have railed against inequality but were guilty as charged on that matter.
As for the comment The DM would bring down Mother Teresa, well why not? she was far from the saint The catholic church paints her she employed some very, very questionable practices in her time. However, that's another discussion altogether.
Has anyone else got a silent dog ?
