Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to ask why the Sun and the Mail newspaper are so hated on here?

428 replies

missnamechange · 06/12/2011 11:18

I have name changed for this as i am a regular MNer and i know i really ought to know this Blush but i don't

i read the Sun every most days, i like the vacuous celeb gossip and their easy to understand way of writing (again - Blush ) and the womens section, and the problem pages

what's so bad about it?

OP posts:
claig · 07/12/2011 11:30

In fact it is probably our most influential newspaper, more so than the Murdoch press.

claig · 07/12/2011 11:36

And the reason it is influential is because of its huge readership and the fact that 'middle England' generally agrees with many of its positions. The politicians know that and I think that is why Jonathan Powell said what he said about it.

Nancy66 · 07/12/2011 11:43

JaneBirkin - MailOnline is entirely separate from the newspaper. Something MN users don't seem to be able to understand.

JaneBirkin · 07/12/2011 13:28

Do they? I mean appear unable to understand that? I don't have any trouble understanding it, I'm not thick. I didn't know whether it was different entirely or had some crossover areas, but I knew it was a different format and probably contained different items.

Does that matter? it's still the daily mail, it's still owned by and written by the same company and it still has the same attitude and general overall political leanings as far as I know.

Not that I have looked at the actual paper since about 1986.

JaneBirkin · 07/12/2011 13:30

and I don't really understand why people sometimes generalise about 'MN users' when they are clearly MN users themselves, and that aside, we are all wildly different in our intellect and outlook

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 14:07

The MailOnline is entirely separate from the newspaper? Hmm Really? You have an odd definition of separate, since they are owned and published by the same company, contain many of the same stories and columns, and one is the online version of the other. If you go the site, there is a heading called "our papers", which offer subscriptions to the Mail and Mail on Sunday, and similarly, the print paper contains references to "our online version: dailymail.co.uk".

Could you please explain to us what you mean by entirely separate then, as you are right, I am unable to understand?

Nancy66 · 07/12/2011 14:08

Of course it matters - it's a completely different product, written by a different team and aimed at a different audience.

The website isn't the newspaper - therefore using stories that were never in the newspaper in the first place, to highlight what a terrible product you think the newspaper is, is a bit misleading.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 14:12

Its not a different product at all. Its an online version of the print product. If you look at todays front page of the Daily Mail, the exact same article is on the online page, same photos. As are most of the others. The same columnists are printed online and in the paper.

So, again, can you explain how these 2 versions of the same thing by the same company are "entirely different" and where we have a problem understanding this?

Nancy66 · 07/12/2011 14:18

It's not an online version of the print product.
The website carries features and news stories from the paper but also features hundreds of extra stories/columns/photographs that are not in the paper.
The website is celebrity driven and the majority of the celebrity stories do not appear in the paper. It also leans heavily towards lesser known American celebrities (as the site is widely read there.)
It also features: blogs, columns, fashion, diet stories that do not come from the paper.
I don't know what the precise breakdown is but I would imagine that over half of the online content is unique to the website

JaneBirkin · 07/12/2011 14:18

as far as I'm concerned I was using the link to the online version to highlight how awful the online version is - no one had sought to differentiate at that point.

Your point Nancy isn't entirely relevant, I don't think

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 14:22

So its an online version with extra added bits? That by no means is an entirely separate product, is it? Not even in the slightest.

I'll await your retraction of that statement, and your apology for implying that MN'ers were unable to understand something that wasn't actually true.

Or are you going to go all DM on us and wait for pg 42 to put in a line about getting it wrong?

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 14:24

Here's the MailOnlines own tag line, in case you are still confused:

MailOnline - all the latest news, sport, showbiz, science and health stories from around the world from the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers

JaneBirkin · 07/12/2011 14:25

Neu, did you see this?

Nancy66 · 07/12/2011 14:28

You'll be waiting a long time.

The Daily Mail newspaper and the Mail Online are not one and the same.

JaneBirkin · 07/12/2011 14:41

Nancy, that's a technicality in terms of this discussion.

Please see here.

PigletJohn · 07/12/2011 14:42

"completely different product, written by a different team"

really?

Nancy66 · 07/12/2011 14:48

Yes, really.
Mail Online has its own editor, it's own editorial team and its own advertising and marketing team in the Uk and US

PigletJohn · 07/12/2011 14:52

so it's not true then when NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas wrote:

".... If you look at todays front page of the Daily Mail, the exact same article is on the online page, same photos. As are most of the others. The same columnists are printed online and in the paper."

I just like to be clear about these things. I suppose being in the trade you get to know details that are not apparent to the public.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 14:56

Thats answering a different question, Nancy, in true journo style! You said, and I quote:

JaneBirkin - MailOnline is entirely separate from the newspaper. Something MN users don't seem to be able to understand

We have clearly proven that they are not entirely separate, they aren't even very separate, so yet again I will ask you to explain the above comment.

Nancy66 · 07/12/2011 15:01

No, you haven't 'clearly proven' anything. I've explained how it works. Disregard that if you like.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 15:06

No, you haven't explained anything at all, least of all your comment above.

The Mailonline themselves state that they are the online arm of The Daily Mail. The online managing editor describes herself as working for the online department of the Daily Mail. The tagline for the website is, as stated:

MailOnline - all the latest news, sport, showbiz, science and health stories from around the world from the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers

Almost all of the articles from the print paper appear on the website.

So, in an attempt to get a simple answer to a simple question, please tell us how the MailOnline and The Daily Mail are "entirely separate"?

We are agog, waiting, to know how you know different to the ACTUAL PAPER AND WEBSITE THEMSELVES, who go to great lengths to state how they are in fact intricately entwined.

Well?

claig · 07/12/2011 15:33

I like the Mail, which is why I read the Mail online as well, so the Mail and the Mail online are close enough for me, or I wouldn't bother reading the online version.

But I think that Nancy is saying that some of the gossip and celeb stuff online, which seems to be part of what many people think the Mail is all about, is not part of the paper and is aimed at a younger audience and also a US audience.

SinicalSal · 07/12/2011 15:36

Come on Nancy, I'm interested to see how you respond.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 07/12/2011 15:37

She might mean that but its not what she actually said. She said they were entirely separate, which we know is not true. Some of us look for accuracy, why is one reason I don't like the Mail.

claig · 07/12/2011 15:41

'Some of us look for accuracy, why is one reason I don't like the Mail'

That is a low blow. The Mail was very concerned about accuracy in the 'Climategate' affair.