Thread about Harrop

Harrop was suspended for a month and that has long since passed, Christina, so we can only imagine he's been back in the saddle for some months now. Let's hope he keeps his opinions to himself after his experience, we really don't need to know them.

Is Harrop practising again now?

I agree with @andyoldlabour and you also get some decent debates on GB News. I've seen Alastair Stewart chair some really good ones with a range of views, nuance and the possibility of some of the participants changing their opinions after what they hear from others. I like Andrew Doyle's show very much too.

My reading has moved to the journals you mention too - it is more like old-school ex-change of opinion than virtue signaling sermons and catechisms that you get on the Beeb and Guardian. The Daily Mail is ok, it is not a hate filled rag, but a mix of too much daft celebrity stuff (with all the rubbish that goes with it) alongside some proper, decent journalism (lead by the MoS) and a devil may care attitude to being cancelled - which at the moment is just what is needed.

Oh dear! How sad!

One link led to another and suddenly I found myself on the Daily Mail website's "Trending" Page for Jimmy Savile - and who do I see in Pride of Place? 💉💊☠🚩

I guess this is what comes of repeatedly comparing a much-loved woman author to the most prolific (or just best known?) UK paedophile and necrophiliac, then having all those quotes picked up by pesky internet algorithms?

web.archive.org/web/20220622033843/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/jimmy-savile/index.html

What a shame! 😭

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10268121/Troll-GP-humiliated-determined-suspended-offensive-tweets.html

Ooh that was my quote!

In answer to So back to the beginning. Having been on MN for a couple of years, I've picked up that everybody hates the Daily Mail. Has this opinion changed?

I have been here a very long time and I feel MN definitely used to be a lot more left leaning than it is these days (which is most likely just because it's a much much bigger site these days and the population as a whole is more right wing than it used to be)

Personally I feel that yes, the Daily Mail used to be generally and rightly derided on here as an awful right wing misogynistic rag. But the older I get and the more the TRA narrative takes over the world, I'll acknowledge any common ground with an organisation or person standing against this - without having to agree with all their views. This also applies to people not just companies. A lot of people who hold GC views also hold other views I don't agree with.

For the rest of it, I can't really say it better than the excellent post from @Bellendejour at 18.42.

The Mail did the right thing re Stephen Lawrence because Paul Dacre had met Stephen Lawrence's father, I think had employed him as a housepainter? So in a sea of racist bile he suddenly pursued one story because of a personal connection. It almost made it worse for me - that the reporting skill, legal expertise and heft of a national paper could be used for good, it was a choice not to do that.

The Mail publishes anti gender stories because they are excellent click bait for sexists and distract attention from government crap while giving Tory voters a reason not to vote Labour or Lib Dem. They'll publish the same about feminists and indeed have done.

I suppose more than any other news source, the DM reports just about everything. From serious issues to sleb twaddle and MN threads! It's obviously up to readers to be discerning, and to maybe do a second level of fact checking on stories picked up from browsing the DM. But that applies to news from any source. Where there's a different slant, have a think about why, and who has what agenda.

Very little in life is all good or all bad.

^This. One of the many important things of which the gender debate seems to be reminding some people (including me) is that there aren't many people you would agree with on every single issue, and also not many people you would disagree with on every single issue. It's ok to agree with someone you don't otherwise like.

Good sense is to be applauded wherever it's found and whoever is saying it. And if good sense on an important issue is reaching a wider audience because it's being published by a very popular publication that I happen to dislike, it would be foolish of me not to be happy about it. Does that mean I now read and like the DM? No.

Very little in life is all good or all bad.

"The DM exposed the men who murdered Stephen Lawrence."

And considering that many people's perception of the average DM reader - white, right wing, lacking in intelligence - that took a lot of guts.
As a person who considers themself traditional Labour, I find my daily reading includes - The Spectator, Telegraph, Times and Mail, plus MoS.
I remember the shameful coverage of the New Year sexual assaults in Cologne, by the Guardian and Independent, plus the BBC.
However, the Mail is to be commended for their coverage.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4036668/No-touch-New-footage-Cologne-sex-attacks-reveals-women-screamed-attackers-police-realise-powerless-stop-them.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3393228/Cologne-sex-attacks-planned-gangs.html

By automatically barring some news sources, it is quite easy to become trapped in a "purity spiral".
I think GBNews got off to a rocky start, but their standards have really improved.

The DM exposed the men who murdered Stephen Lawrence. The kept on and on when the police behaved so badly.

Their news team must be huge, as the website covers so many subjects, and most of the time you can just get the general facts without too much emotive language. They also report on a lot of stuff that the UK and US press don’t touch

Yeah, the fact that they are often faster to pick up stuff than the beeb is why is do sometimes use them.

I hate to admit it, but the general reporting in the DM is pretty good. Their news team must be huge, as the website covers so many subjects, and most of the time you can just get the general facts without too much emotive language.

Their news reporting is often excellent. They do investigative stuff and have broken some important stories. When it comes to complex health issues their journalists are often very good at breaking things down in a clear and accessible way.

I think most people don't see that because, quite simply, they don't read the Mail. I can see why they don't (under Dacre, you used to get some horrible inflammatory headlines about immigrants) but it's a shame because people miss the good stuff. Most journalists don't go into their profession because they want to spread misinformation - they actually go in wanting to find things out and report them honestly and truthfully.

But they do have bloody awful columnists and opinion pieces which drag the site down and keep it in the past. Plus the body shaming celeb stuff. I assume that’s the stuff that makes them their money and funds their proper reporting.

The Mail and MoS have run some very good, well-researched articles about genderbollocks for some time now, certainly at least since the Man Friday protests. I look on the site almost every day now because that and the Times, along with the Spectator provide the best coverage of the issues that concern us.

Yesterday the Mail covered Dr Deplorable, the RCM backtrack and the US college transwoman swimmer breaking the women's records. They've also covered Posie's AHF campaign and billboards, all the cancellations of women in academia, the Nolan podcasts and the Maya F, Harry Miller, Kate Scottow and Allison Bailey cases. Jenni Murray has a weekly column.

The articles always get a lot of comments from the readership and it's clear that more and more people are being peaked every time.

Anyway, back to the good doctor...
(Actually, I don't think we'll be hearing much about him for a while)

The DM article was probably the most robust coverage and included a second article with screenshots of conversations by Harrop with the odd name others might recognise like S Hayden who was involved in Harrops tribunal proceedings.Joss Prior is supposedly one of Harrops patients and online cheerleaders but not a fan of this forum neither is Hayden lol.
The VICE article is awfully sycophantic and I suspect Harrop tried Pink News but they appear not to have taken the bait, least so far
The Echo appeared reluctant to copy the story and had previously covered Harrop as the poor man who got his tyres slashed, an odd pitch by Harrop to the Echo to get coverage and some free new tyres

Harrops actual private life hasn't been commented upon in general though he did a gay radio show interview where he goes into a little detail and it must have been after the GMC warned him twice before, Harrop was dismissive when he spoke about the warnings on radio as though he was somehow immune

He has a remarkable and enduring lack of insight into his own failings and clear!y still sees
himself as the victim in all of this and I suspect will always believe that

Nah. He's already had far more attention than is good for him.

I actually don’t want to.

This is why we need a plurality of voices in our media.

Now. Shall we talk about Twitter troll, disgraced Dr Deplorable?

(The title of this thread is maybe misleading click bait... it seems to be about the DM rather than the unappealing medic.

It's a mix - good coverage of some things, awful on others. DH reads just about every 'paper' , he says DM is surprisingly good on financial stuff.

We have a subscription to the Times, that generally seems better balanced than most of the other available news sources.

I think the mail has changed. It was always an odd mix of mostly clickbait but some strong investigative journalism but, for many years, it had a hateful tone and was often unreliable on the facts. It was the mail that caused the MMR panic with dozens of articles of lies, to pick one example of many.

Since Dacre moved up I haven't seen any outright fibs and the news reporting seems straighter. There is certainly less overt bile.

It's still not a paper I'd choose to read but I think it's no worse than the guardian now in terms of its ratio of dross to value.

I hate the daily mail but ultimately we’re in a corner. Stonewall has insinuated itself and its bullshit ideology into every organisation from government to the NHS, schools, the legal profession, every kind of company, fucking breastfeeding groups and rape crisis centres. This is NOT A DRILL and we need some blunt instruments like the Mail etc to get the word out to your average joe on the street and make the govt and the main political parties realise Self ID is a mistake and they need to start rowing the fuck back on all the concessions they’ve already made re single sex spaces and organisations.

I’m not going to start buying the Mail or anything but I will click the shit out of any article they write that reveals the truth of what’s happening around single sex spaces, what’s happening in schools and with children being transed/mutilated/sterilised, the horrors of experimental sex change surgery, the heartbreaking stories of detransitioners, sexual coercion/rape of lesbians, and TRAs abuse, doxxing and oppression of women, women losing their jobs, women being forced to compete against TW at sport, women not even being able to call themselves women or mothers etc etc ETC! This is an emergency! 🚨