to hate the way The Mail employs a gang of female hacks to write b*******

[rupaul]

In particular one called Shona Sibary/Vann (don't know why her name's suddenly changed) who has employed multitudes of au pairs, whilst not being able to afford private school whilst sending her kids to private school but not all of them whilst hating her parents and so on.
Then there's Annabel Giles who one wek was writing about all her expensive work done on her body and not long after an article on being practically penniless.

These women seem willing to write anything for the money even if they're writing about having no money at all.

Of course, male journalists don't write any old tripe for money do they?

Oh, have they got their stories mixed up? How amusingly reassuringly incompetent.

In this case, I think the women demean themselves and their women readership, So I don't think the fact that men also write tripe for money counters my argument.

Wow- breaking news- journalist demeans themselves for a story

I dislike the female reporters of the Mail - actually all reporters, but once you've read/seen the pattern of Richard Littlejohn's vitriolic columns, the rest pale into insignificance.

A friend of mine is a freelance journalist specialising in real-life stories. She turns down requests from the Mail for this kind of first-person piece because they always want to include a photo and the editors usually add loads of colourful lies exaggerations to the story before they go to print.

Erm don't read the Mail

Instead get yourself a copy of Private Eye and read Polly Filler

Oh for god sake..

DON'T READ IT IF IT UPSETS YOU

YABVU

There you go.....

There must be more Mail readers on MN than on any other forum in the universe. I bet the Mail has a MN spy to see how often it is quoted here.

If you don't like it, why give it any thought/publicity at all?

I love the Mail, as it happens - it makes me laugh a lot. And I'll supply whatever RL stories your friend doesn't want to supply, wellwisher.

That puts me off MN

So the logic should be that if I don't read the Mail, there will be nothing about it to irritate me.

I know I would find the Guardian hopelessly, revoltingly irritating. So I don't read it, and I don't have to feel annoyed by it. Why waste annoyance on a newspaper that you don't have to read?

rupaul I found you more than rude towards Shona Vann. I guess you have problems with women generally speaking and women who work and especially women who both work and have kids...It is sad to waste your time criticize instead of enjoying life.
Regards.

I can't see why anyone would want to read the tripe in the first place. I utterly detest columnists and would much rather have a shorter paper with just news in it, whatever the bias. Columnists are just a bunch of second rate hacks who don't want to get off their fat arses to go out scouting for hard news. Much easier and cheaper to sit in the office typing out crap to fill column space between adverts.