I read lots of different online papers, and I often look at the DM first, then check out the reports elsewhere because the DM tells non-stories, stories that were reported elsewhere a few days previously, down-right lies and sensationalised versions of the truth. They aren't the only paper that does it, but they do seem to do it more than everyone else, especially now the News of the World has gone. Their view of women is frequently demonstrated in archaic terms, and the assumptions they make about certain classes of people is discriminatory. Children still do analyses of column inches of certain subjects at school, and just recently my grandson did a project in which five daily papers were examined, looking for the way different subjects were reported, such as political debates in parliament. The DM was top (?) for giving the age of female politicans and their husbands' occupations, as one small example.
As has been said, the majority on here are intellgent enough to be able to see the flaws in the DM's reporting methods. They say we get the press we deserve! Consumers who just want gossip and innuendo do us a disservice. If we read papers from around the world we don't have the worst press, but journalism is no longer a noble career, if we gauge it by the DM and some other papers.
