I write for the Daily Mail. AMA.

[Mailista]

Specifically, Femail. AMA.

And the online department is usually people in their twenties, scouring the internet and local news sites for find stories to publish that might be a talking point, or newsworthy. The pace they do that at is huge which is why there is often loads of mistakes. The editors need to keep up.
Anyway, they're the ones nicking the mumsnet threads!

Do you consider yourself to be a feminist?

Not a question but I can't help but point out that for someone so proud of their grammar, your posts are littered with grammatical errors.

Downhere do they really do that? A friend of ours has been offered a DM exclusive, but another red top is also interested. Does that mean that she risks being dropped?

I'm a journalist (I have never worked for the Mail, but have a friend who does. She's left-wing and lovely, perhaps surprisingly.)

RE the 'nicking Mumsnet threads' issue:-

I don't understand why people are surprised that journalists lift stories from Mumsnet. If a Mumsnet thread has a lot of engagement, then it is surely going to get a lot of views elsewhere, too.

I've never lifted a thread myself, but I completely understand why journalists do it.

It's not 'lazy' journalism either . I used to work in online news journalism, and we had a ridiculous quota (7) for the amount of stories we needed to publish in a day. Try finding that much content in an 8 hour shift! Maybe people should blame the management at the papers for over-stretching reporters rather than pointing the finger at "nasty journos", who get a lot of flack already.

p2 “it was my dream job too”
p4 “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.“

Uh huh.

I used to work as a freelance too, alongside my full-time job in magazine production. I would never have written for the Mail.

For people asking about errors, there used to be plenty of sub-editors. It was my first magazine job, and it was fantastic. As circulation dropped, anyone who wasn’t producing something visible was cut. I see so much text now that clearly hasn’t been checked by anyone (editors certainly can’t be arsed, in my experience). We also used to have strict style guides - amongst other things, these guides banned a long list of clichés, but I suspect the Mail has a different attitude towards them!