Well done Ed Miliband for speaking out about the Daily Mail's article on his father

[claig]

The Daily Mail used a low tactic of accusing Ed miliband's father of hating Britain.

I think it was a nasty thing to do. Just because someone is a Marxist and may criticise some aspects of the country or its instiutions does not mean that they hate Britain.

Paul Dacre has been conspicuous by his absence from the airwaves, hasn't he? I wonder why he sends out his lieutenants to defend this bizarre attack on an academic and hasn't said a word himself?

He very rarely speaks to the media. He's not very good at it. Possible that he has had a bollocking of some kind?

I do wonder about that, Petite. Esp. given Rothermere's slapping down of Geordie Grieg for the MoS sending a reporter to Miliband's uncle's memorial service.

I think Dacre's strategy is smart, because the more we see him in public, the more likely it is that he may say something wrong or make a mistake and the more the public is likely to get sick of him. By keeping out of it, he avoids all that.

But the spin doctor Campbell is on our screens too often and the public will soon tire of him, and even Ed is appearing too often and smiling through every interview instead of appearing serious. It is a bad strategy and the Mail will come out the winner if it continues. They are giving Campbell the rope with which to hang himself.

Rothermere has apologised for that, but not for the article. I don't think he has publicly defended it either.

Am glad Ed said that this was nothing to do with regulation but to do with right and wrong. All those going on about regulation don't seem to realise that even if Leveson recommendations were fully implemented, which is not goifg to happen, they would still be able to publish a comment piece like that. I am sick of people turning it into a regulatory issue. The journalist going to the memorial goes against current PCC guidelines, so there would be no change there either.

The City Editor is on now dodging questions.

Credit to the BBC. It was a good interview of Miliband. They didn't give him an easy time or an easy platform. They did ask him some tough questions like "what more do you want?" etc

' Possible that he has had a bollocking of some kind?'

I don't think that Dacre has had a bollocking. If he had had a bollocking, then the mail would be apologising for their article, but instead they stepped up their attack. I think Dacre is in full control and has the full confidence of the proprietor.

Missed it, shame as it sounds interesting.

Petition now has 43,000 signatures.

The City Editor was saying that they have nothing to apologise for wrt the original articles or their reaction.went on about how the headline needs to be read incconjunction with the article, very much following the party line, so to speak.

I think you're right claig I don.t think Dacre gets bollocked. This is not the first time they have messed up, however, and there is a lot out there about his behaviour and treatment of staff, so I am not sure, other than financial success, what rothermere looks for in his editor.

I think the Mail on Sunday editor's position has been weakened because of the mistake and the apology that he has issued. But Dacre is even stronger and has issued no apology.

' I am not sure, other than financial success, what rothermere looks for in his editor'

I think Dacre is a brilliant strategist and leader. The important thing for him is to understand the Daily Mail reader and give them what they want, because the Daily Mail reader can make the difference as to which party wins general elections. The Daily Mail is Middle England's paper, the paper of the middle classes, and anyone who understands the aspirations and convictions of the middle classes can swing elections. Dacre gets it, he knows what we believe, he gives us what we want.

Dacre is for real, he is one of us, even though he is rich, he is one of the people and understands what we feel. He is not interested in publicity or appearing on TV like someone like Campbell. He is dedicated to politics and has respect for the middle classes and their wishes. That is why he has been at the top of probably the most influential paper in the country for so many years.

Very interesting Guardian article about Dacre and the Mail on Sunday editor

"The reason for Paul getting out of bed in the morning is to edit the Daily Mail. He is not the type to glide into retirement, to golf courses and a gentle life. He doesn't cherish high office, being a peer."

www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/03/mail-on-sunday-tensions-greig-dacre-miliband

Thanks I will read that. Good thing about weeks like this is all the stuff written about it from varying viewpoints.

I am middle class. It is not my paper and doesn't speak for me in the slightest bit. I don't know any middle class people in real life under 50 who read it other than when it is flagged up for some reason or another.

Just read it. I would quite possibly pay to watch PD being dragged kicking and screaming from the DM building :o

As far as the newspaper is concerned he did a good job for them, but the ranting the last year or so makes le think he might become a liability very quickly.

Poor old Gordon Brown. That was made up. But once it was out there, how could he rebut it without looking worse?

'No I don't like the Arctic Monkeys. They're derivative and I think their indie image is manufactured. I much prefer Leonard Cohen.'

Petite, it is not the paper of every middle class person, but it is the paper of the majority of us.

You live abroad and probably get better healthcare and services than we get. I live in the East of England. We kicked nearly every Labour MP out of our region. The Daily Mail sells out at supermarkets and newsagents, and it is working and middle classes who mainly buy it.

The reason is that it is in accord with many of our views. We can't change the world, we are only the little people, and that is why some of the little things matter to us. We are against bureaucrats levying bin fines for not closing our bin lids, we are against secret courts where daughters are secretly jailed for wanting to remove their father's from care homes, we are against the deterioration in our hospitals and worried about things like the Liverpool Care Pathway and we are for less taxation and more responsible spending of public moeny and we are against climate change scams and against attacks on Syria and against lenient sentencing for violent offenders And the only paper that supports us is the Daily Mail, and that is why it sells out in supermarkets all across our region.

There's another trhead which linked to this video from Question Time last night : m.youtube.com/watch?v=73ZCrDtAC7A&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D73ZCrDtAC7A

Brilliant! I applauded.

claig you are right, I live abroad, and don't have to deal with the issues the middle classes do in the UK. However...

The Mail does not sell out in supermarkets for the reasons you give. It sells out because it plays on your fears, and twists facts, repeatedly , to wind its readers up. Other newspapers also discuss the same issues, albeit slightly less hysterically - I personally like the Indie and despite the Murdoch ownership quite like the Times.

Anyway while it is playing on your fears and creating new ones, it adds in human interest, often anti woman articles by the likes of Jones, Brick and Sibary which are perfect gossip fodder. As far as women are concerned in fact it is positively dangerous. My mother who reads it is always banging on about how often women lie about rape, how Bercow, or Blair, or Clegg's wives are . In fact, in all the time I have known her as an adult I don't think she has ever said a positive thing about any woman other than certain actresses or commenting on friends' parenting or cooking skills. And this is not the only DM reader I know like this.

It isn't in accord with middle England's views. He looked at what they were, and used his knowledge to shape the views, manipulate them into something which has none of the tolerance and kindness which we are so highly rated for abroad.

As the years go by it becomes more and more a parody of itself and I am delighted that people, real people with power or gravitas, have come out of the woodwork this week and shown it for what it is: baser than most tabloids but pretending to be something better.

I think the "middle class" is so vast and disparate that you can't possibly generalise about it, Claig. Lots of people buy the Daily Mail because of its showbiz gossipy stuff, while still sneering at it. Others regularly click on the stories in order to disagree with them on the message boards. Many middle classed would sooner die than buy it. There will be some who believe all it tells them, but it's certainly not all its readership.

Another middle class person (sadly not with a middle class salary though ) who doesn't read the Mail.

Nobody I know reads it either. I wouldn't deny that it speaks for a certain group of people however.

That's true Hester. I don't read it at all (online or hard copy) but have heard of the infamous "sidebar of shame".

'It sells out because it plays on your fears'

Yes, it does play on our fears. It voices our real fears, and it campaigns for them and demands change which iss what we want. We were against the liverpool Care Pathway and we were shouted down by all of teh stablishment media, but the Mail kept campaigning on it and eventually the millionaires in government had to do something about it because they know that we are the true majority. Brown doesn't have his Big Conversations with us, in fact this out-of-touch elite despises us and the newspaper we read and buy in our millions. it is only through the Mail that we get a chance to voice our concerns and force our concerns onto the political agenda. The Mail spells out our fears to the millionaires in government and because it is so powerful, they eventually have to listen to us.

But we are also for freedom and freedom of speech and no press regulation and for getting bureaucrats and petty Beamters off the back of the people. The eite deride us and say we are "populist". Of course we are populist, because we are the people and not the millionaires.

' In fact, in all the time I have known her as an adult I don't think she has ever said a positive thing about any woman other than certain actresses or commenting on friends' parenting or cooking skills. And this is not the only DM reader I know like this.'

I bet she has had a few positive things to say about Margaret Thatcher.

' I am delighted that people, real people with power or gravitas, have come out of the woodwork this week and shown it for what it is'

The millionaires have come out, the ones with access to chateaux, and on gravy trains and the career politicians and advisers and the Lords have come out against it and have accused it of hating Britain while it it in fact Britain's second highest selling newspaper. The reason that they despise the Mail is because this out-of-touch privileged elite despise teh people and think they are too stupid to know what they really need.

Actually you'd be surprised, she has very little positive to say about thatcher. Loves the Queen however, but then again, so do I.

claig you and I have argued this point many times on these boards the last few years. I am not part of the elite, or wealthy, and am not actually all that well educated. I am about as normal middle class as you can be. And there is nothing wrong with a paper being populist. Au contraire, they should all aim to be populist to a certain extent because the more people learn about the news, the better.

However, I will say again an again that the mail is dangerous, manipulative, dishonest and really dislikes a lot of what it means to be British. Clegg put it perfectly yesterday and I never agree with him.

No-one wants press regulation, we all want a free and responsible press. But responsible they have not been. It is very sad.

Come off it, the Mail is an establishment paper and always has been.

But claig, you weren't actually opposed to the Liverpool Care Pathway; you were opposed to what the Mail told you the Liverpool Care Pathway was. And there is a big difference.

My last comment was in reference to claig's post.