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

[missnamechange]

I have name changed for this as i am a regular MNer and i know i really ought to know this 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 - ) and the womens section, and the problem pages

what's so bad about it?

Fair play, keSnowBi, I think the DM is probably a bit different, more deliberately scaremongering.

I am also a bit bemused though at the idea that people would pretend to read the Guardian, not sure what the point of that would be!

The Sun has a measured reading age of 7 !

I was taught about the reading age thing at college sue. From what I remember the reading ages quoted on this tally with what I was told and I doubt they've changed.

I don't think that's a bad thing. Many people do have lower standards in reading comprehensive and they shouldn't be excluded from news because of it.

These days people are excluded from news because of what their paper-of-choice chooses to write about but also through their own tastes which heavily influence editorial decisions. How many times do you hear someone saying: 'I don't know anything about politics/they're all the same etc?'. No wonder why The Sun's political analysis is largely confined to page 2.

I was always taught it was a good thing to be able to write informatively for tabloids and arguably more difficult than writing a piece for people with excellent English comprehension and wide attention spans.

So I find it quite funny that some broadsheet readers don't notice distortion, sloppy reporting and inaccuracy in their favourite reads. It's not just confined to the tabloids.

What I would say is that while I don't like the news values of the Daily Mail, I read it every day and it is, to paraphrase nancy66, an excellent product as is the Sun which I don't read as much.

I mean reading comprehension I think Reading Comprehensive is a school

Jesus, I wish people could spell the names of these high-brow publications they claim to read.

INDEPENDENT

CORRESPONDENT

A classic example would be the Winterval myth - ie that crazed politically correct counsellors in various parts of Britain have renamed Christmas Winterval so as to not offend non-Christian groups.

Thing is, it's not true. Never has been true.

Winterval was the name of an event held in Birmingham back in the 1990s. But it; hasn't stopped the DM repeating this story as fact for about 10 years, most recently Melanie Philips.

I think they had to apologise for this fairly recently.

am also a bit bemused though at the idea that people would pretend to read the Guardian, not sure what the point of that would be!

Well quite! How do you pretend to read a paper? And why would you?

I used to work for Today norriscoleforpm. Let's be old together

So I find it quite funny that some broadsheet readers don't notice distortion, sloppy reporting and inaccuracy in their favourite reads. It's not just confined to the tabloids.

No indeed limited and I've read stories in the DT and G where I've gone, 'huh?!' but broadsheets do have a remit to check facts and give right of reply. Tabloids don't. If the DM wants to pretend it's a broadsheet it should at least behave like one.

You could read the Sun from cover to cover and you wouldn't learn a thing, except maybe the football results. Its a rag, a vile, misogynistic, lowest common denominator, puerile rag.

the Mail is much the same but for people who want to feel superior.

because they are written to appeal to the bottom of the barrel in terms of intellect, education & morality. Neither has any redeeming features at all.

KeSnowBi - the DM does give a right to reply on all stories

This is quite a confusing thread.

Many people who say they hate this paper must read it because they are also very knowledgable about it!?

I have no opinion on either the mail or the sun BECAUSE I don't read them. I have no idea what they are lie (unless I am going to base my opinions on what people say about them which I wouldn't do.)

So why read them if you hate them so much?

I also think it's unfair to tell someone they should be ashamed of themselves for not knowing about the Sun/Hillsborough connection. I'm not aware of it at all. I was 5 years old, why would I be? And I'm not even in the youngest age bracket here, I bet there are plenty of MNers who weren't even born and only have a vague idea of what Hillsborough even IS, let alone an intimate knowledge of which newspaper reported what!

Well quite! How do you pretend to read a paper? And why would you?

Indeed & why would reading the Indy/Torygraph/Grauniad be viewed as something so challenging that people would lie about it? Perhaps if the depressing majority weaned themselves off the utter shite that the Mail & Sun purvey the IQ of the country would increase.

I once thought that the Gurdian had published a somewhat distorted article. I wrote to the journalist Ian Katz and he wrote me a long letter of response, going into the detail a bit deeper. I still didn't agree with him but I appreciated his argument.

I've never had a response from the Daily Mail,

'Gurdian'. Oh dear.

You don't have to read them to know about them. And you pick things up from clicking on others links/what people tell you about them, etc.
I've never been to America but I know loads about it.

Just look at the Sun. Look at the inane headlines and the tits on pg 3. You really need any more indepth knowledge than that to tell you how shit it is?

kesnowbi The Mail have indeed started a Clarifications and Corrections column on p2.

Today it carries the important news that Mark Cavendish got an MBE not an OBE.

I don't know what else might find its way in there but in the spirit of Christmas I am willing to think well of them .

I am interested to know whether Mahzer Mahmoud will continue stitching people up now he's shifted from the NoW to the Sunday Times. Not that Mahzer hasn't uncovered some important stories too.

Yesterday Simon Kelner was on Sky. He didn't acquit himself well when asked how the Independent could continue to employ the lying plagiarising fantasist Johann Hari and reconcile that with a commitment to real news and accuracy.

Also, about half of the adult population is not intelligent or highly educated. Many adults do have a reading comprehension of less than 10. THat doesn't make them lesser people and they shouldn't be referred to as 'thick' or 'bottom of the barrel'. Why shouldn't there be newspapers with low reading ages as well as high ones. And why shouldn't people be interested in celebrity news if they want to be?

Also, re page 3 models, I have several very left wing feminist friends who think stripping is a good, empowering thing for women. Two of them are strippers themselves. THey say they are taking back control of their own bodies and liberating themselves. It makes them feel good and like they are in control over the men who watch. I don't agree with them but it's a feminist viewpoint that's out there.

Because they're total shite. They're vacuous, full of absolute bullshit, sensationalist and usually wrong. They are very damaging and their journalists cross boundaries like no others.

Why would anyone not realise this?

Nancy, Sorry but that's simply not the case. I could quote example upon example of where stories have run and the first thing the person involved knew about it was opening the paper. And when they've contacted the DM they have had zero response. These are mostly stories about 'civilians' btw, I imagine they are more careful with the celebs. More money for a start.

If you want to do it from a purely evidence-based perspective, if there was right of response how come so many stories are completely one-sided, without even a 'so and so did not comment' at the end? Perhaps they asked and found the story was different to expectations, but ran it anyway without comment in case it ruined the slant?

really manicinsomniac?

You've never glanced across the front pages of either in the garage? Or at the supermarket? Because the headlines give you a reasonable idea of the quality of the writing/opinion/reporting. That & knowing the Sun still has page 3 models.

(I've no idea what the Hillsborough thing is either though)

Well I wasn't born when a lot of events happened in this country and abroad, but I know about them. I'm interested in the history of the media and how information travels within society. That's why, to me, the Leveson inquiry matters.

The Sun has long been the subject of the news, as is the Mail now also.

The idea that the Sun caters for a low reading age but embodies 'high' feminism is ... interesting.

KeSnowbi - it is the case now. Maybe not in the past.