Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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 · 09/12/2011 18:03

'The assumption seems to be, as I said previously, that the Guardian represents all right-minded thinkers and therefore can't be offensive whereas the Mail is simply not to be tolerated.'

Reminds me of Stalinists somewhat.
Freedom and tolerance are great things, and we have a great diverse press with papers like the Guardian and the Daily Mail. They all bring some good ideas to the mix.

alemci · 09/12/2011 18:03

A selection of newspapers is always in the school staffroom on the coffee table. The mail seems to be fairly popular. It is also quite easy to flick through and doesn't take much effort.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 18:04

Mail inspired views often offend. Probably because they are offensive. Are you trying to blame it on the offendee? Bad form, though very DM.

PS, the metaphor was quite clear. Have another try.

claig · 09/12/2011 18:06

'A selection of newspapers is always in the school staffroom on the coffee table. The mail seems to be fairly popular.'

Sounds like a very good school, indeed.

alemci · 09/12/2011 18:11

definitely Claig and free tea and biccies.

ChattyKa · 09/12/2011 18:23

Mail inspired views may offend - I don't blame it on anyone, it is just a fact, just as Guardian inspired views may offend - read the comments on the CIF pages. If someone is offended by the Guardian do you blame their offence on them? Anyone can be offended by someone else's view. I think you have proved my point - you feel that Mail views are intrinsically offensive - but what about the millions of people who agree with those views? All I am saying is that we all have a right to express our views surely.

And sorry but please explain the metaphor I am obviously too dim to get it ...

Tyr · 09/12/2011 18:27

I don't read newspapers as a point of principle but come across the stories when they get reprodiced on internet forums or people tell me about themThe Mail in particular seems to thrive on causing resentment against asylum seekers and benefits claimants. It also has a penchant for deliberately misleading stories about Human Rights legislation.
I don't think the Sun gets taken quite so seriously. If WW111 ever breaks out, The Mail will probably lead with a story like "Benefits sponging,lesbian,asylum seeking mother of 15 gets 5 bedroom house at tax payers expense!" The headline in the Sun will probably be something like "Vicar rapes budgie in Shropshire!"
No good ever comes of reading either of them.

limitedperiodonly · 09/12/2011 19:38

Mrswifty 'sandal-wearing Guardianistas' is more of a Littledick insult in the Mail rather than The Sun.

However, the idea that the Guardian and the Independent don't take a moral stance makes me choke on my free-trade muesli.

And I speak as a Labour voter.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 19:41

Yes I do feel that Mail views are intrinsically more offensive, but this is based on knowing exactly what those views are and knowing how much they differ from the sane my own. I have no qualms in saying so, and neither do a great many other people.
I don't read the Guardian by the way.

You have a right to express your DM allied views, and I have the right to express my derision and disgust at same. What, indeed, is your point?

limitedperiodonly · 09/12/2011 19:46

I don't read newspapers as a point of principle. So what makes you think you can comment on them Tyr?

I find views such as yours far more ignorant and offensive than those expressed by any other poster on this thread because, even if I don't agree with them, at least those views are informed and sincerely held.

I believe people like you are quite dangerous when in control of a vote.

limitedperiodonly · 09/12/2011 20:03

I don't ally myself to the Daily Mail neuro or indeed any other paper.

As an experienced journalist I read them all with what is a balanced and informed eye, undoubtedly helped by my thirst for all news and knowledge of the industry.

I find things to like in most of them and more things to dislike in all of them.

You haven't said what you read. Perhaps you'd like to. It would help the debate.

I don't think the public is well served by any of our papers. The standards of reporting across the board are uniformly shit. That's even before you explore political and social bias.

I'm probably most distressed when I see old men with copies of the Daily Mirror that they probably started buying 60 or 70 years ago. I wonder why they're wasting their limited money on stories about the X Factor. But I guess it's habit.

It's because they remind me of my own father who I wish was still alive but only if he couldn't see what reporting for the working man and woman had become.

That certainly doesn't mean that I am a Tory-basher. As I said, I keep an open mind.

You can express derision and disgust at my views if you can find something there to disagree with.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 20:14

Why would it help? If for some reason you must know, I don't have a particular paper that I buy or subscribe to, for work purposes I have to read a great many articles from a lot of sources, so my reading material is wide and extensive. It even includes the Mail on occasion, when it can't be avoided.

I have an open mind, but when an opinion you have is constantly reinforced it tends to hold. My experience of the Mail tells me that it's slant is bigoted and nasty, and its worse than others because it heartily pretends otherwise. I find the "left wing" papers (in as much as there are any anymore) a little more open in their biases.

The Sun I find hard to give the name of a newspaper, its a comic with a sports section.

Tyr · 09/12/2011 20:16

limitedperiodonly Fri 09-Dec-11 19:46:38

I don't read newspapers as a point of principle. So what makes you think you can comment on them Tyr?

I find views such as yours far more ignorant and offensive than those expressed by any other poster on this thread because, even if I don't agree with them, at least those views are informed and sincerely held.

I believe people like you are quite dangerous when in control of a vote.

I think people who form their opinions based on the tripe they read in tabloids to be dangerous in control of a vote, if indeed voting is a dangerous activity.
I get enough of the stories reproduced on forums like this and see enough of the headlines every time I go into a shop to have a view.
What exactly do you find offensive?

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 20:29

In the interests of accuracy I've just had a read of the Mail Online's leading story. Headline "Le Snub. The moment Sarkozy refuses to shake Camerons hand", it goes on to gleefully expound on how Cameron strode over hand outstretched to shake hands and was rudely snubbed. They have still photos that seem to show same.

Thing is, they imbed camera footage of the "incident" that shows no such thing. Clearly Cameron strides quickly past him briefly touching his elbow. Cameron didn't even slow down, he couldn't have shaken his hand if he'd tried. Which he didn't.

Do they think their readers are utter idiots? And thats without the utter nonsense of of the accompanying article.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 20:38

BTW, I checked and its not in the guardian, times, telegraph, le monde, irish times.....it is however lead story in the Mail and the Sun.

There's that opinion being reinforced yet again.

limitedperiodonly · 09/12/2011 20:39

neuro where have I said that the Mail is not bigoted and nasty? It clearly is but it has some merits. I respect the views of some of its political and economic commentators although I may or or may not agree with them.

But you have to recognise that there is political bias everywhere and as a left-leaning person what I really dislike is the idea in the Left is that you do to people because they can't work it out for themselves, poor things.

One of my favourite quotes is this, from C. S. Lewis. I doubt if I'd agree with many of his other political, social or moral views, but for me. he's spot-on here.

'Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.'

That's what I despise about the main editoral stance of the Guardian and the Independent and that's what what people who in shorthand are described as 'bien pensants' fail to understand about ordinary people.

BTW what is the all the 'if for some reason you must know'? It's not a trick question. I'm just asking so I can better understand your point of view and political education.

That's the way I've been taught to reach understanding even with people with whom I might disagree.

And as I've said before, there are merits to the Sun. Particularly its excellent TV critic Ally Ross. I don't read the sports section so I'll take your word for it.

claig · 09/12/2011 20:42

'I think people who form their opinions based on the tripe they read in tabloids to be dangerous in control of a vote'

I think there is a lot of snobbishness about tabloids.
Tabloids are generally more in touch with the people than the broadsheets, which are more highbrow and deal with that they consider more important issues.

Lots of PR types, spin doctors and politicians may look down their noses at tabloids, but come election time they fall over each other to get their message across to the voters and they use their influence to get articles into the tabloids.

The tabloids often run good campaigns that teh people care about. I have heard it said that tehe BBC check the papers in the morning to see what is setting the news agenda, and the Daily Mail is a huge part of that agenda.

There was one particular week many years ago when the tabloids ran a story every single day for at least a week on frankenfoods and GM food. The BBC had to follow and also reported it. The Daily Mail was reporting every single day and ministers had to answer questions and be interviewed about it. The people were deeply interested in their health. There were protests and marches across the country. Broadsheets often find the cares of the people too insignificant, they may prefer to talk about sustainability etc.

You need all types of media to reflect the views of the people and not to pull the wool over the people's eyes.

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 20:45

At some point the bad outweighs any good. And who said I have to have a balanced opinion? I have my own biases, I wouldn't pretend otherwise. And of course there is political bias everywhere, thats obvious enough. I think the difference is that the likes of the Guardian are more open of their biases, they aren't hidden. And they don't dumb down in the way both the Mail and the Sun do, in very different ways.
If you are looking for Lewis' moral busybodies, look no further than the Mail, with its slimy, untruthfu,l vox pop of the hidden middle, right thinking christian white middle classes, who they insist are ignored and abused by the PC agenda. Its an insult to our intelligence.

Pandemoniaa · 09/12/2011 20:46

Yes, the tabloids certainly can be very keen on campaigns. Take Hillsborough, for example. Or rather don't.

claig · 09/12/2011 20:47

limitedperiodonly, excellent quote by C.S. Lewis.

That's exactly why we need papers to hold our leaders to account. The Daily Mail is one of the most feared papers on that front, due to its vast readership and the fact that it is in tune with millions of our citizens.

limitedperiodonly · 09/12/2011 20:48

What exactly do you find offensive?

I'm afraid I do not have enough time left on this earth to answer your question fully tyr

claig · 09/12/2011 20:49

Remember teh Russell Brand, Jonathan Ross affair. The Daily Mail put the pressure on and the BBC had to respond.

What about these comedians like Gervais and Carr and their disgusting jokes about disabled people. It is tabloids that publicise and force the TV companies to start thinking twice.

Pandemoniaa · 09/12/2011 20:51

Claig, forgive me if I missed this earlier but do you work in the media?

NeuromanticisedVisionsofXmas · 09/12/2011 20:51

The fact that its in tune with millions of your citizens scares the shit out of me, if true.

Pandemoniaa · 09/12/2011 20:53

Who the fuck would want to be "accepted on MN" by claiming to read The Guardian? Surely that's a whole new conference worth of material?