I write for the Daily Mail. AMA.

[Mailista]

Specifically, Femail. AMA.

Hi Mailista, hope you are well! :)

What do you think of all the speculation that the Mail will become more pro-Remain (whatever that now means in practice) when Geordie Greig takes over? Is it likely to be too little, too late, in terms of changing public opinion?

All good questions.

Hello, Agustarella. I can't answer that one as I am too much of a lightweight ever to get involved in the DM's politics section. I am strictly 'lifestyle'.

My personal view is that I would be beyond delighted if the DM became pro-Remain. It couldn't change anything in itself, but I can only hope that if there's enough pressure from all sides, we could at least end up with a re-referendum. As I say, though, that's just my personal view.

Safari, I've never had anything rejected because it's not in line with the DM's politics (if you mean party politics). I have, though, had to re-write pieces to bring them into line with the house style. I've also had pieces killed at the last minute, just because (eg) something else more topical has suddenly emerged.

Mike, agree re 'truth universally acknowledged' and all similar lines. And I also agree that there's definitely a toxic element to anything to do with women and weight - though that's even more the case with sleb magazines. I think the ones that worry me most are the really insidious comments - the Telegraph, for instance, will always start pieces on actresses/female singers etc with a little paragraph about their size, their hair, and what they're wearing. I find this even more toxic than out-and-out 'look how skinny so-and-so is'.

Troy, I have never in my life submitted a piece to any publication with a single spelling or grammar mistake. Though I have sometimes corrected subs, who have imported mistakes (this goes for all the publications I have worked for, not just the DM).

Whatabout - I couldn't say! I have only ever spoken to him on the phone, and he was very polite to me. Every section has its own editor, so you only ever really have dealings with your 'own' editor, unless there's a good reason to have dealings with anyone else.

@mailista: diplomatic but disappointing !

@whataboutbob I know. Wish I could say otherwise!

Why, on the fashion pages, is everything so horrendously expensive? Hundreds of pounds for skirts, tops, bags, whatever? Way beyond what the average woman can afford to spend!

@Mailista thanks, and your personal view re Brexit is the same as mine. I suppose it's hard enough figuring out what's going on with all that at the moment, never mind a few months in the future!!

Augustarella, I appreciate that. I am not such a hardline Remainer that I would cut off my friends who voted for Brexit. But I think just think that it would be a bit better on balance to Remain. Enough for me to hope that there might be chance for everyone to re-consider in the light of the information available now.

Single, I don't work for the fashion pages. But I completely agree with you. The same is true of the Torygraph, Times and Guarniad. This is not how we all live!

Do you have to pay bloggers if you write about them ..? For example, if a post on their page does well and it gets featured ? I see a lot of ‘mum bloggers’ gain notoriety this way but do they get paid ?

Are you going to write about this AMA in your paper? Or any of the other AMAs?

What do you think about the general hatred towards The Daily Mail? What is your demographic?

Are you a staff writer or a freelancer?

Hannah, I don't know the answer to this, as I have never written about, commissioned, or been involved with a blogger.

Glitter, no, I am not going to write about my AMA, or anyone else's.
I can see, I think, why so many people hate the DM. I am personally not a fan of the Guardian. But I wouldn't be militant about it.

Noloud, I am freelance.

To those who have asked if I am/if I have met other DM writers. I can't answer any of those, as it would be outing if I replied in such a way that either invited further suggestions or confirmed suspicions. Sorry!

Ooh, you can write about this in the Mail. I use this story with my LangLit sixth form students as a warning about the extent to which you can trust what you read online. It was the time that the Mail ran the online story that Amanda Knox had been found guilty at one of her appeals. The article described what she was wearing, what the judge said, how Knox responded to the guilty verdict, how the court room reacted...

Except Knox had actually been found innocent. It seems the Mail had both stories ready to go, pre-written, and uploaded the wrong one... Great journalism.

So my questions: Do you feel that writing for the Mail requires you to sacrifice your own professional values and sense of integrity? Are you proud of what you do?

Do you have a desk or are you wfh?
Do you still have Starbucks in reception?
How many pa’s does PAUL Dacre currently have and are they all still very “public school”?
Is your editor male or female?
If female - is she a super stroppy cow😜?
How long have you worked there?

Would I have known you? 😳

Do you feel that writing for the Mail requires you to sacrifice your own professional values and sense of integrity? Are you proud of what you do?

^this

Onlylivingboy oh dear... but not entirely unheard of in any line of journalism!

To answer your other question (and Believeitornot), I have a bit of a tricky relationship with myself over the DM. I partly love it, but I am not entirely comfortable with myself all the time. As for whether I'm proud of it... Well. For every feature I've felt dubious about, there has been another that I have actually felt proud of. There was one in particular (can't say, as outing) which involved interviewing three women about a sensitive subject. They were all absolutely delighted with how it turned out, and it also raised awareness and money for a particular cause. I did feel very glad I'd written that one.

Pooh, I wfh, and have never set foot in the offices, so sadly can't tell you about Starbucks (or anything else). I have had numerous editors, all female. Some have been nicer than others, but they have mostly been delightful. I'm still friends with some who have since moved on, just because they are lovely, kind, generous people.

Will you feel happy on your deathbed about having made a living from helping to create some of the most vacuous, sub-literate, sexist, body-shaming drivel that graces the public domain?

When you go out to the shops, or play with your children on a beach holiday, are you ‘showcasing your curves’, or ‘encasing your ample derriére in a green one-piece’? Or are you simply a woman going out wearing clothes, not having figured out how to leave her body at home?

How long have you been writing for Femail?

Is it the case that the pictures accompanying the story give clues to the wider truth behind it. eg if a celeb couple is rumoured to be having marital difficulties one of the pics of them will be of the couple with the rumoured OM / OW but one that is taken at a party or something with no actual other reference to the OW / OM.

Sorry am late in my reply.

I meant that I take it as a serious offence to write that way about women. That I am seriously offended, not that I take it seriously in any other way!

I get that it’s about revenue - I am one of your disliked PRs, so I understand the business... but I don’t think it should be taken lightly.

It’s insidious. I hate it. Many of my brands are now starting to regard coverage in the Mail as damaging which is interesting.

For what it’s worth, I always start my emails with hope you’re well, I think it is a common courtesy statement and receive quite a few from journalists addressed that way!

Irma, I haven't in fact written any pieces along those lines. If I were on the beach with my kids, it would probably say 'Mailista looks gaunt and anxious in an ancient Speedo one-piece, as she tries to stop her bickering children from killing one another'.

Wee, thanks for explaining. I do on the whole shrug off any of the crap about women's appearance, weight, looks etc. That said, I stopped reading the online comments about my articles because some of them were so vilely personal. I had to advise my mum to do the same, as she was upset by it (as I would be now, if I read anything like that about my own DC).

I'm sorry if I came across as disliking PRs. I don't, at all, and I completely take your point about 'I hope you're well'. It's just a pleasant way to start a conversation, and I apologise if I came across as snotty.

Squeaky, the answer is that I don't know. However, I wouldn't be at all surprised. There is an awful lot of mischief that can be made without saying a thing (again, though, this is not specific to the DM).

Noloud, abut ten years.

Is all right, will let you off. There are some shocking PRs out there I grant you (not me).

It seems you agree with the rest of us that the way the paper (particularly online) writes about women and girls is nasty and wrong. Snap reaction is to think how can you bear to work for them?

But I can see that it’s more complex than that.

Follow up question- what do you think of Sarah Vine?

Sarah Vain? I don't know her personally...

Wee, yes, as always, things are more complicated than they might seem. On the face of it, it's easy to wonder how people can (morally/philosophically) bear to do what they do. But when you find yourself in a familial and financial position you never wanted to be in or imagined you would be in, you have do whatever you can to make ends meet.

What is your opinion on the side bar of shame? Kiki FLAUNTS long legs etc

Are you friend with Aloha? she used to post on MN and was a DM journo. She was a bit of a racist - are you?

Just reading this through quickly, it seems to me that you 'don't know' in response to an awful lot of questions. You have to 'do something to make money'. There is a sort of general attitude that you don't know, don't speak to your colleagues much, don't write the dodgy articles and don't really care much about their impact anyway.

Why are women always described as 'flaunting' or 'showing off' when they walk along the street or are seen outside their house at all. The implication is that a woman can't just be going about their daily business, they must be attention seeking. Why also are their clothes so desperately important? As in 'she wore a blue shirt , emphasising her 'casual look' i.e. she is scruffy and looks a mess. The tone is always snide and sexist. It disgusts me.