Am I being a sanctimonious nobber re: Daily Mail?

[Undertone]

OK - so I know I shouldn't have but I read Liz Jones' latest piece of trash in the Mail on Sunday website today. I won't link, but to paraphrase: she feels entitled to use the emergency services (a&e, fire brigade) for trivial reasons (removing an earring, a stuck kitten) because she 'pays her taxes' and goes private for most things anyway. The piece ended on a note saying she admired Stephen Fry's bravery - NOT for talking about his suicide attempt but for the fact that he tried to do it with pills. I know - WTF?!

Anyway - she's a sadly limited woman used as a troll to drive DM traffic. But something in me snapped today.

Casual acceptance of the bigoted, chauvinistic, entitled and sometimes downright dangerous opinions she and other DM columnists get published is toxic. Yes there are lots of people that protest, and the DM editors rub their scaly hands with glee at all the attention it gains them, but outside of the Twitter and outraged lefty bubble there are millions of people who read it and go "oh - that's a published opinion. Must be legit." And by tiny increments flawed, lazy and insular patterns of thought become ever more embedded.

Anyway - (I AM getting to the point) I don't have many friends on Facebook - quite a tight group really - and I posted a status about how I'd had it with the DM and the next time somebody admitted to reading it I would challenge them about it (meaning, really, someone in a pub or at work).

So who should bloody pop up and comment on this status but one of my good female friends (she and I are going on hol together in a few weeks, just the 2 of us) saying "I am a DM reader and proud - sorry!"

A bit of context - I love her to pieces and I have known her for about 13 years now. She and I have clashed on issues before (she doesn't believe in feminism, and thinks it is unfair to men - I have had to start avoiding the subject with her now because she doesn't accept my beliefs and won't let it go when an argument has run its course).

I want to challenge her about it, I want to explain to her why (from an outsider POV as a non-DM reader) I find it such an offensive newspaper and feel so strongly about it. It would be best if I just picked up the phone to her now and had a discussion - but is that weird? I mean - posting a flippant FB remark and then someone ringing you up to argue about it? Should I send her an email?

Crucially I want to explain myself without insulting her so that the holiday isn't awkward. But it was a surprise that she reads the DM and I do unfortunately think a bit less of her. This is what I am worried will come out in a spat.

Help - AIBU to challenge her? Maybe she missed all the terrible stories I've seen Can you help me with some links to send her?

Although Mumsnet & The DailyMail seem to be vehemently opposed to one another, I do find it really odd that there are so many references to 1 particular newspaper. I can't be the only mumsnetter who NEVER looked at the Dailymail online before reading mumsnet & linking to stories from posts cush as this one, only to be sucked in by the high proportion of femail interest stories that appear on the Dailymail online....I have no idea whether this is reflected in the printed version.
Whilst their politics may appear to differ, their business models for online publishing are mutually beneficial. It would appear to be the most cynical version of astroturfing on the web

Super - I think the DM does something quite ninja with its website content in terms of optimising it for search engines. Means they get posted higher up the rankings by Google vs. a different page on the same subject, so people researching issues and news online are more likely to read a DM article on the subject. Potentially, then being outraged by what they have read, the righteous internet user high-tails it to MN to vent.

More likely, the DM plants links in threads on MN because they know we are verbose and active online, and likely to share and drive traffic to create more advertising revenue for them. Is that what astroturfing means? I don't know the term.

"The next time somebody admitted to reading it I would challenge them about it"

Because you are the thought police and are somehow entitled and superior to do that? I sort of understand your point but the language you use makes it sound like its justified to challenge people who don't agree with you on something.

Bit confused tbh as surely by the very nature of your post YOU are a DM reader, having had a sneaky look on there :)

Always surprised by the amount of DM bashing on here. I can't comment as genuinely don't read it so have no idea how vile it is, or otherwise.

It's not really about the politics of the Mail. I don't really have a problem with some newspapers being right-wing, even though I don't share those views. There are even some things I like about the Mail - some of their features can be excellent.

My objection to the Mail is a moral one, in particular the bullying attitude it displays both towards certain celebrities and towards ordinary people. The Littlejohn column about Lucy Meadowes was an obvious example of that, but there are plenty of others. It also distorts stories to the extent where they could in some cases be accused of just making stuff up (look at some of the pieces they've run on Muslims, for example). So it's not the politics, it's the nastiness.

Um - well I feel entitled to challenge them on a) whether they were aware that the DM published prejudiced and unresearched opinion pieces (independent from a political viewpoint, so not in aid of a line of topical argument), and b) if they were aware, then how are they OK with that?

I don't see that's policing their thoughts. It WOULD be policing their thoughts to say "you are not allowed to be right wing". That's not what is being questioned here.

I guess that yes because I have read a few DM articles I am a DM reader.

May I recommend Kitten Block (eg for Chrome but search for versions for your browser) ? If you inadvertently click on a DM link it automatically redirects you to something calmer so you don't add to the click count and thereby increase their revenue.

The Guardian is a joyless heap of dog turd too, mind.

(phone wants to correct joyless to Hitler, frighteningly)

I could write my own post but I think I'll pinch hackmum's

OP, I wouldn't ditch a friend because they read the Mail but I wouldn't find much common ground with a woman who said she didn't
believe in feminism. I wouldn't row with her. I'd just think she was a bit dim and possibly trying to pick a fight with me.

And mignonette, thanks for that link. Fuck me.

Kitten block duly added. To save us from ourselves.

I am sick of all the posts moaning about the daily mail

Why would you challenge anyone that reads it? Its none of your business what people read. Reading the Daily mail does not mean you are a racist bigot and agree with their views.

I read the daily mail. Not every day, or even every week. I like a lot of the historical stories in it.

I don't believe all the crap they and every other paper prints.

I am an intelligent adult who can make up her own mind.

I do not think 'all foreigners should go home' or that immigration should be stopped. I dont believe that everyone on benefits is a scrounger or that all travellers are thieves. I could go on.

For a paper that's so disliked on here there's a lot of people that read it.

"A bit of context - I love her to pieces and I have known her for about 13 years now. She and I have clashed on issues before (she doesn't believe in feminism, and thinks it is unfair to men - I have had to start avoiding the subject with her now because she doesn't accept my beliefs and won't let it go when an argument has run its course)."
So you have to avoid certain subjects with this woman because she is like a dog with a bone if you disagree with her.

Can I just ask - you say you love her to bits, but why? I really wouldn't want to go on holiday, just us two, with someone who attempts to steamroller me into agreeing with them.

I'm sorry op but you actually sound like a scary bully, you dont like what she reads so you are going to challenge her about it!
Reslly whats it got to do with you? If you views are so far apart how did you ever become friends? You sound like the sort of person who always know whats best for everyone, I'm not sure I would want to go on ho
iday with you.

OP doesn't sound like a scary bully to me.

You have to have worked at the Mail to truly know what scary bullies sound like.

She does sound like someone who's going to be fighting a pointless battle and I'd like to save her the effort.

I missed this bit:

You sound like the sort of person who always know whats best for everyone

You do read the Mail, don't you?

Disclaimer: so have I

People on here views probably repersent at best about 10% of the population and it seems, they think that the other 90% of the population are either bigots or uneducated facists. This site is at times is just a group of left of centre "OUT OF TOUCH" high earning University Educated people who in most cases live in their own bubble.

Who also think that Grammar is more important that what someone is trying to say.

There are now 3 things certain in life: - death, taxes, & that someone on Mumsnet will be talking about the daily mail and Liz Jones.

Who also think that Grammar is more important that what someone is trying to say.

And spelig

For some reason the feminism thing never came up in about 11 years! The one day i mentioned a book i'd read which was interesting and i brought it up in the foyer at the cinema when we were about to go in and she was like "that's just bollocks". Cue hasty tete a tete before film began then row continued after in the pub for bloody hours. It's like i didn't know who she was.

So something feminist comes up now and she says something about it - i skate over the top of it. 99% of the time she's exactly the same as ever and normal.

But what's 'something feminist'?

Original book was 'Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism'. The 'something feminist' in the past has been me commenting on the Everyday Sexism project and when we talk about maternity leave in the future, or when one of us in our wider friendship group has been heckled in the street. Stuff like that.

It's perfectly ok and very normal to have friends who have very different political ideals to you. You either enjoy healthy debate or accept that you think differently and avoid the conversation.

Either way, it's only an issue if one starts trying to convert the other, which is sanctamonious and a bit nobbish IMO.

Not read the book undertone but I'm at a bit of a loss as to her thinking on the other issues.

She must have well hidden talents, but if I were you, I cba.

What does she say about mat leave? Will she not want any?!

Great post Undertone. I wouldn't enter into any heated debate over why your friend reads the DM though. Otherwise aren't you just perpetuating the awfulness of it all! I agree it is diabolical mind you I am a single mum currently claiming IS so for my sanity won't touch it with a bargepole. Hate hate hate the way that just because something is written in black and white people just accept it as the truth. Including my own mother, drives me insane.

Read that book a while ago, undertone. I am quite surprised that she could talk about that book, or indeed the other issues, as being unfair to men, and ignoring the whole issue of things being unfair to women.