Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think the Daily Mail has gone totally downhill?

97 replies

NameChangeMay2026 · 20/05/2026 20:57

Yes, I know it's always been a right-wing rag, but it used to be a lot more fun and interesting for stories about people I had actually heard of, royals, health stuff, and human-interest stories.

However, these days I find very little I want to click on. The royal coverage is all "Kate, saint who walks on water" and "Meghan, bad witch who should be burned at the stake." I also like Kate better than Meghan, but their coverage is a joke. The sycophancy over Kate is to such a degree that surely it must be written ironically.

I look at the home page and the sidebar, and 90 percent of the people named, I have never heard of.

The health stuff is all warnings about dire conditions that are really rare in the real world. It used to be useful information, but now it's just endless scaremongering. I see the headlines and I just roll my eyes.

The really interesting human-interest stories have gone. Now the stories are all about someone I've never heard of snubbing someone else I've never heard of on social media. Really inconsequential stuff.

My bar for mindless scrolling really isn't high, but the DM has managed to bore me into not really reading it anymore. I used to read many of their articles. Nowadays, i look at the front page still, but less, and don't find much I want to click on. I expect the next stage will be just not ever looking at it.

Also, much of it's behind a paywall with really misleading headlines to get you to sign up. There's no way I'm paying for that trash, so I use an archiving site, but often it doesn't work. And less and less can I be bothered to go through the process anyway.

If you used to enjoy the site, do you also find that it seems to have gone so downhill that it's almost as if they don't want readers anymore?

OP posts:
NameChangeMay2026 · 25/05/2026 13:08

OvernightBloats · 21/05/2026 07:56

They are catering more and more for the US market now. Using American words so much that it seems their focus is not here.

The aim is to get as much money as possible by writing sensationalist headlines which get the clicks. The articles usually don't match up to the headlines. It's all clickbait rubbish. There are some well written articles but they are hard to find now!

The Mail's obsession with using 'flaunting' describing women is so misogynistic. It has definitely got worse. Used to be a guilty pleasure but their worldview as a whole is depressing so I spend very little time on there now.

Oh God, yes, and don't get me started on "pins" and "post-baby body"! 😡

OP posts:
SqueakyFromme · 25/05/2026 13:09

I know someone who buys it in physical format !

Kitestring · 25/05/2026 13:19

I read it was the worlds most read site and it is under pressure to keep filling it up, hence the non news that now predominates. The spelling mistakes and poor grammar are good for a laugh. Please don’t point out my spelling if it’s bad, nor grammar- I am not a journalist. I suspect a lot of their content isn’t written by journalists either.

NameChangeMay2026 · 25/05/2026 13:20

SqueakyFromme · 25/05/2026 13:09

I know someone who buys it in physical format !

How are they not embarrassed to be seen with it!!

OP posts:
SqueakyFromme · 25/05/2026 13:21

@NameChangeMay2026🤣🤣🤣🤣 some people just have no shame I’m afraid

NameChangeMay2026 · 25/05/2026 13:26

DrEmilyCrabtree · 21/05/2026 08:20

It has always been horrendous. This is the paper that was happy to support Hitler in the 1930s. Jan Moir is lower than low. The disgraceful piece she wrote about Stephen Gately just after his death should have been the end of her career. The fact that she still works for them says it all, about both parties

I didn't know about that Gately piece. Tried to look it up but they've pulled it. Sounds awful.

In the 1930s, Britain had a Hitler-appeasement policy, championed by the PM, Neville Chamberlain. Possibly the DM was following that party line and doing its part to try to avoid a conflict. Maybe other papers at that time were doing the same.

OP posts:
NameChangeMay2026 · 25/05/2026 13:27

SqueakyFromme · 25/05/2026 13:21

@NameChangeMay2026🤣🤣🤣🤣 some people just have no shame I’m afraid

Omg seriously. Or maybe they read it in working men's pubs where everyone else is reading it too!

OP posts:
LittleBearPad · 25/05/2026 13:27

SqueakyFromme · 25/05/2026 13:09

I know someone who buys it in physical format !

I think the website and physical paper are quite different. The Times website is an internet version of the actual paper as is the Guardian. whilst for the DM the website is largely misspelt Americanised dross. The physical paper whilst its views are questionable is still a properly edited coherent newspaper. The physical paper is a better purchase than DM website subscription

SqueakyFromme · 25/05/2026 13:30

NameChangeMay2026 · 25/05/2026 13:27

Omg seriously. Or maybe they read it in working men's pubs where everyone else is reading it too!

I think she may hide it under her tubes of ky jelly, sex toys and anusol suppositories ? I would anyway 🤣🤣🤣

CaragianettE · 25/05/2026 13:30

NameChangeMay2026 · 20/05/2026 21:12

I'm fed up with her too, because she can't get on with anyone. Always the same. Fighting with exes etc.

The only one worth reading still is Jan Moir. She writes about people I've heard of and has a wonderfully funny turn of phrase. But one occasional columnist does not a newspaper make.

Jan Moir as in the one that published an article in the wake of Stephen Gately’s death, when his family and friends must have been in intense grief, saying his death was ‘not natural’ and that it proved gay people could never live happily ever after in a civil partnership, and then never apologised for the content of what she had written when, amazingly enough, it turned out he died because he had an undiagnosed heart condition? That Jan Moir?

YABVU to suggest that the Daily Mail has ever within living memory been anything but ‘downhill’.

Jc2001 · 25/05/2026 13:31

Propagandalf · 20/05/2026 21:29

I stay away from the news. Sick to death of hearing about Trump, Starmer and Putin all of the time and their needless warmongering.

I swear it wasn't like this back in the 90s.

Bloody hell you must have a short memory.

Off the top of my head

Gulf war
Bosnia
Kosovo
Genocide in Rwanda
Chechnya

Desperatelyseekinglazysusan · 25/05/2026 13:32

However, these days I find very little I want to click on. The royal coverage is all "Kate, saint who walks on water" and "Meghan, bad witch who should be burned at the stake." I also like Kate better than Meghan, but their coverage is a joke. The sycophancy over Kate is to such a degree that surely it must be written ironically
This has been going on for years! .

Monty36 · 25/05/2026 13:34

All papers good and grotty are competing with TikTok and YouTube if that is possible to believe.
Which is worrying for the future frankly. If people get their news from TikTok we are all doomed.

NameChangeMay2026 · 25/05/2026 13:34

CaragianettE · 25/05/2026 13:30

Jan Moir as in the one that published an article in the wake of Stephen Gately’s death, when his family and friends must have been in intense grief, saying his death was ‘not natural’ and that it proved gay people could never live happily ever after in a civil partnership, and then never apologised for the content of what she had written when, amazingly enough, it turned out he died because he had an undiagnosed heart condition? That Jan Moir?

YABVU to suggest that the Daily Mail has ever within living memory been anything but ‘downhill’.

I didn't know about that article until another PP mentioned it. Just looked up the controversy. They've pulled the article, so I can't see it, but it sounds dreadful.

Yes, it's always been downmarket, but they used to have interesting health and human-interest stories. Now it's all people I've never heard of.

OP posts:
80smonster · 25/05/2026 13:52

Always been a rag.

dottiedodah · 25/05/2026 13:57

I agree 10 years ago a good read .Ok maybe a bit too right wing .However now vacuous articles from US .celebs and whos fallen out with in the Royal family .I have read it best part of 40 years! My GDP worked in the print and Nan was his assistant ! They met through work and my Aunty and Uncle were set up on a blind date by them as well! Used to snaffle GDP copy and read as a teenager!

Jc2001 · 25/05/2026 13:58

80smonster · 25/05/2026 13:52

Always been a rag.

This. Except with the advent of on-line journalism (I'm using that word very loosely) they seem to have set the bar even lower than even Daily Mail readers thought possible.

JE001 · 25/05/2026 14:05

It was a low bar to start with, but the DM's turn to cost cutting, shedding staff and driving those who remain to chase clicks, has indeed made it worse. Many stories are evidently written with AI 'help' and the quality of sub-editing has nose-dived. They have even lost their political direction, unsure whether to back the ugliness of Reform or the feebleness of the Tories.

Thetreesaregreeninspring · 25/05/2026 14:14

The paper that supported Hitler has gone downhill?

tamade · 25/05/2026 14:14

I haven’t read it for years, but I used to. They had some good columnist articles and perhaps still do. But I need to load it via VPN and I can’t be bothered.
A lot of people slate the DM but it is/was a popular product, when other papers were going out of print and paywalling their content they didn’t have to.

I probably wouldn’t bother with it if it is as you describe @NameChangeMay2026

EasilyPleased · 25/05/2026 14:15

Thetreesaregreeninspring · 25/05/2026 14:14

The paper that supported Hitler has gone downhill?

Yeah. Apparently the quality of its muckraking has declined from that spectacularly low bar.

Pedallleur · 25/05/2026 14:19

It's always been awful but reflects it's owners the Rothmere family.

Pedallleur · 25/05/2026 14:22

Thetreesaregreeninspring · 25/05/2026 14:14

The paper that supported Hitler has gone downhill?

He made the trains run on time. Who knew he was a bad un but the Rothmeres have always been dodgy. Luckily their money has bought influence

ByGraptharsHammer · 25/05/2026 14:24

Hurrah for the Blackshirts

justasking111 · 25/05/2026 14:25

CanaryLibra · 20/05/2026 21:14

I’ve given up with it as about 80% of it’s behind a paywall now.

And the crosswords etc have gone to hell. Was the main reason I checked in.

It's a very mediocre trash mag now I think. And no I'm not paying for it.

Swipe left for the next trending thread