ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
...preparing for a flaming......aibu to not understand why everyone hates The Daily Mail?(138 Posts)
I don't get what the problem is?
You are going to think me very rude for saying this op but if you don't "get" why people dislike the Daily Mail then you come across as a little short on basic common sense.
Fine to defend the DM if you must, fine to read it if you have nothing better to do, but, really, you must be able to see why other people hate it just by looking at one or two headlines therein.
The only person I know who had something written about them in their they tried to make out his dad dying turned him into a drag queen. horrible stuff.
They hate my employers and therefore me. [proud]
My lovely lovely FIL was once the target of a daily mail story (well, series of stories actually) many years ago. Their hacks were camped outside his house for days on end, baiting and abusing him. When his child died in very sad circumstances, they tried saying despicable things about the little boy to get a reaction from him. I can't (for obvious reasons) say exactly what the original story was about (it was to do with his work), but he did fuck all wrong and was hounded and hounded for it.
Suffice to say, the daily mail wouldn't even be used as toilet paper in this house.
Another thing you can guarantee about the comments section - if the artcile is set in the UK but features non-white people, the top-rated comments will all be things like 'B-but.. surely there's some mistake! This can't possibly be the UK.... can it??'
Just a bunch of tossers.
I read the daily mail online, for the comments more than anything else, it's entertaining. I also read the guardian, telegraph, independent, huffington post and about a dozen other news sites and blogs, it doesn't mean I agree with any of them politically. You'll never know what the news is if you keep to only those you politically agree with because everyone produces propaganda to fit their agenda and hides items which don't and you won't see it if you think you're reading the truth (a rare thing). You have to read through the lines and if you read widely enough about any issue you'll know when journalists are lying or just ill informed.
Because its a load of shit, that fills gullible idiots with barmy ideas. The real question is why every other paper doesn't get the same rap, because they all fit this same description.
I have finally broken my DM habit. It's no good for my blood pressure.
I hate the way they employ female writers to be professional hate figures. I highly doubt Liz Jones and Sam Brick are so unreasonable in real life, but if they stopped infuriating people on the DM site they'd be out of work.
I hate the disingenuous articles, like the way they print photos of a famous woman looking a bit tired, no make-up, and gush about her outstanding natural beauty in the article, just so the readers can let rip with '30? She looks 50!' and 'I didn't know Gollum was a natural beauty!!'
I hate the misogynist baiting headlines, like when they annnounced young womens prison places were being cut, prompting 'Discrimination! This country hates men!!!' when the article goes on to say clearly that far more young mens prison places were being cut.
And the comments section.. The recent article about Doreen Lawrence being made a Baroness had the most disgusting comments underneath it, they had to have been coordinated by a racist group. And last year I read a story about a 13 year old girl who died during a PE lesson at school. Someone commented underneath 'That's what she gets for leaving the kitchen.' That comment had been approved...
So women can look at the sidebar of shame and say "look at her".
All well and good, but the hatred of women goes beyond the trvial fluff you get in say, Heat magazine, yet its readership remains overwhelmingly female.
It would be like 'The Voice' newspaper containing nothing but wall to wall racist articles and gushing praise for the BNP.
I'll be the judge of that thanks clare.
"it encourages otherwise sane and reasonable people like my parents and my ILs to come out with statements like..."
They were not sane and reasonable in the first place.
What don't you get? Have you read it? Have you read the sneers about it? It's not subtle.
So women can look at the sidebar of shame and say "look at her".
They hate women
They hate aging women
They hate young women who aren't sexy/slags or z list celebs
They hate women who work
They hate women who have kids
They hate women who dont have kids
They hate women who "let themselves go"
They hate women who achieve intellectual success
They hate porn because it competes with the sidebar of shame
All true and yet its readership is mostly female. It is the only national newspaper that has more female reader than male.
I've never understood that.
Because it encourages otherwise sane and reasonable people like my parents and my ILs to come out with statements like:
We can't even give a child a cuddle any more.
Well of course Big Ears was banned from the Noddy stories.
Men aren't allowed in playgrounds unaccompanied nowadays.
What is wrong with voting UKIP?
A woman who accuses Rolf Harris of rape must be lying.
Well your uncle is lucky because he has that mobility car - I can't have a mobility car - and he doesn't have to queue to go up the Eiffel Tower.
DM is lightweight rubbish.
I occasionally read it coffee shops etc and after a few pages it just irritates me.The opinion columnists in particular come across as being narrow minded.
So many reasons not to read it.
I much prefer the Times.
It's only dangerous shit to people with half a brain
Anyone with half a brain should be able to read what is written in the Daily Mail and work out why it's dangerous shit.
I don't think the DM is particularly bad. It reflects its readership's views as does every other newspaper to a greater or lesser extent.
But how can any journo live with the fact that their writing attracts people with the sort of views expressed on MailOnline? Seriously, I've seen comments rejoicing at the death of children because they were asylum seekers. Despite the fact that their rules forbid racism, their moderators seem entirely happy to let overtly racist comments be published. To say nothing of the very sad misogynists who never miss an opportunity to slag off women, and the damaged types who salivate over the notion of corporal punishment for children.
As for that Littlejohn column where he said that the deaths of five murdered prostitutes really didn't matter: how can anyone bear to be associated with a paper which thinks it's OK even to print that, let alone to continue to pay a fortune to the piece of scum who churned out?
The Sun has just started charging for on-line access, so you can't post links to it any more.
I'm hoping that the Mail will follow suit very soon.
It takes the hoiking of judgey-pants to a whole new level.
Everything is the direct fault of an "immigrant" (illegal if possible - although I suspect someone at the DM thinks all immigrants are illegal).
Nice women stay at home baking cakes & nurturing their DCs - however, they are also being selfish for not contributing financially to the household income. If they work, they are lazy & only doing so to avoid raising their own children.
Anyone who has ever claimed any sort of benefit is scum & undoubtedly "on the fiddle".
Need I go on?
It's hypocritical - the headline today is complaining about the trolls who have cyberbullied children leading to them committing suicide.
That is a good headline.
Why can't the DM look at itself and its actions and just have a think about what they write and how that affects real people?
I can't stand the Daily Mail. It's full of crap and the comments section is full of reactionary nutters. Rabid loony right wingers and woman haters.
But I think that Mumsnet is the opposite end of the same battery.
It is also full of reactionary nutters. Rabid loony left wingers and man haters.
Yes, but why does a newspaper or a magazine or an advert have any power to affect your self esteem? It's a genuine question.
I am able to try to put myself into another person's shoes. I would just like someone to explain how the process of exogenous imagery informs a person's identity.
Unless we are all narcissists....(another debate worth having)
It's not, Clare, because I don't read it. But then you don't get why the DM is a problem, so I don't have much faith in your ability to put yourself in the shoes of the many millions of women who ARE affected by this kind of bilge.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.