Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Dacre speaks!

211 replies

claig · 12/10/2013 02:29

Great article full of great points. Too many to list, but this is just a sample.

"our crime is more heinous than that.

It is that the Mail constantly dares to stand up to the liberal-Left consensus that dominates so many areas of British life, and instead represents the views of the ordinary people who are our readers and who don’t have a voice in today’s political landscape — and are too often ignored by today’s ruling elite.

The metropolitan classes, of course, despise our readers with their dreams (mostly unfulfilled) of a decent education and health service they can trust, their belief in the family, patriotism, self-reliance, and their over-riding suspicion of the State and the People Who Know Best."

...

"No other newspaper campaigns as vigorously as the Mail and I am proud of the ability of the paper’s 400 journalists (the BBC has 8,000) to continually set the national agenda on a whole host of issues.

I am proud that for years, while most of Fleet Street were in thrall to it, the Mail was the only paper to stand up to the malign propaganda machine of Tony Blair and his appalling henchman, Campbell."

.....

"The BBC is controlled, through the licence fee, by the politicians. ITV has to answer to Ofcom, a Government quango.

Newspapers are the only mass media left in Britain free from the control of the State."

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2455256/PAUL-DACRE-Editor-Mail-answers-papers-critics.html

OP posts:
Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:18

Petite - that piece is mostly about the newspaper not the website. Dacre actually has very little input with the website

kim147 · 14/10/2013 22:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

kim147 · 14/10/2013 22:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

moondog · 14/10/2013 22:21

The Guardian's Saturday paper is read by about five times more people than that in the week, maybe more. This was what a Guardian journalist who interviewed a friend of mine told him a couple of months ago.
Can't find a reference for that however.

I buy the Guardian on a Saturday.

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:22

Nancy that is true, and I know because we have previously discussed it that you have read all 9 pages of it. But Dacre has ultimate responsibilty for it. How would he justify his fat cat salary without MailOnline?

Original poster
claig · 14/10/2013 22:22

' They supported Blair in many things, including getting him elected and re-elected the first time. At least the comment pieces of the time were supportive.'

I can't remember, but if so I am not surprised. I voted for Blair in 1997. Labour got a landslide because we were all sick of teh sight of the same Tory faces on our TV screens and were all sick of the sleaze.

The Mail stands up for what is best for the country, not what is best for the Tories, and at that time it was best for the country to throw the Tories out and give Labour a chance to serve the people and hopefully change things for the better.

'They were also, iirc, quite pro at least one of the wars'
I can't remember, but Mail readers do not believe everything the Mail says or supports. Mail readers buy the Mail because it is in accord with most or many of their views, but not all of them. And of course, most readers know that the Mail cannot tell the whole truth about many things because they are mainstream. For some things independent bloggers and conspiracy theorists are a better source of understanding than the mainstream.

"They liked blair, at least for a while. They really did. There was a euphoria in 1997"

Yes, I am not surprised. I liked him too once and was very glad he won a landslide and kicked the Tories out. That was the mood of the entire nation at that time. We had had enough and wanted change, we thought he might be with the people and not the progressive elite, but of course he let us down and it didn't last.

OP posts:
Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:24

Moondog - a lot of Saturday editions massively outsell their weekday ones. Usually down to the TV magazine.

Petite. yes, technically he is responsible. In reality he barely looks at it. He doesn't even have a computer in his office.

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:34

But they do refer to him very often in that article nancy he is the All Powerful.

I had read somewhere he doesn't have a computer in his office (may even have been you that told me that). It may surprise you to know that there are a fair few CEOs out in the real world, of big companies, that don't either. Those that still ask their secretaries to dial phone numbers for them, or type the odd email. But I have been one of those secretaries (not Dacre's, and not in your world, and believe me they still know every last detail of what is either on their website or is about their website or is about them.

And... In 2013, you really think he still doesn't look at his website? Really? Your arguement was still valid a couple of years ago, but his bonus rides on the website combined with the paper readership. I know that. You know that. So let's not pretend he doesn't care what goes on it. It's not technical any more.

And if i is then he is a bloody fool. And we all know that he is not.

Original poster
claig · 14/10/2013 22:35

"Mail Supremacy
The newspaper that rules Britain"

Great article, Petite, that is what I like to hear Grin
Will get stuck into that good news later.

OP posts:
Original poster
claig · 14/10/2013 22:36

Thanks for that link about Guardian readership, kim147, that is interesting.

OP posts:
Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:38

He has an iPad and he looks at that but I doubt he'd have a clue who half of the people online are.

His not a fool at all and he is all over every cough and spit of the newspaper, he is just less occupied with Online because he doesn't quite 'get' it.

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:40

claig Blair didn't let us down until the weird warmongering. Which can be explained by some deal with Bush Jr that we aren't aware of. He was a good PM until then. You can bet your bottom dollar (haha) that the economic crisis was purely American based. . If you read foreign press, which I think you do, Gordon Brown was a good Chancellor, and very well respected abroad. He is in fact a role model for Christine Lagarde. Who was also a very good finance minister in difficult times.

Original poster
claig · 14/10/2013 22:42

Nancy66, is it because online does not really set the political agenda?
Is he more interested in the journalists and headlines that set the political agenda rather than the more gossipy articles that make up a lot of the online content?

OP posts:
Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:43

there's a part of me that feels sorry for Blair. he was PM for 10 years and did some great things but it's all clouded by the war in Iraq

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:44

You might not like it so much after reading the article claig . All 9 pages of it. But it is a very good lesson in how to manipulate...

nancy I remember talking about this with you a year or so ago. Does he still not get it? You would know better than me but if he still doesn't get it then maybe he is no longer in the right job. If I was Lord Rothermere and my top bloke didn't understand the impact of his website I'd be pretty pissed off.

Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:44

Claig, it's because it's mostly celebrity based and that's just not an area he knows or cares about (unless it's Joan Collins)

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:45

I feel very sorry for Blair. I think he was a good man who wanted the best for his country. He screwed up on Iraq because he wanted to be in with the Americans. If he had resisted like chirac did he would be a national hero. But he got sucked in...

Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:45

I would say he understands that online is the future but he isn't happy about it.

He didn't know what an app was until about a year ago.

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:47

nancy you are giving too much info away Wink

What does he think of the god awful Snickers advert?

Original poster
claig · 14/10/2013 22:48

I'm a conspiracy theorist. I don't blame Blair because in my opinion Blair and Co didn't have much choice, they were unfortunate to be where they were at the time and they don't have many options on the big issues.

Yes, Brown had done well for a while and was nicknamed "Prudence" and was paying down our national debt, but he made lots of mistakes too with PFI and selling off our gold etc and eventually the chickens came home to roost. A lot of our growth was based on the usual credit booms, but New Labour destroyed more of our manufacturing base than even Thatcher did and there was less social mobility than under Thatcher.

The politically correct New Labour gang only lasted in power so long because Murdoch was backing them. The Mail stood practucally alone against them, and in the end their bubble burst and even Murdoch abandoned them.

OP posts:
PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:48

Well he might not be happy about it but his bonus is pretty much based on it so has to suck it up. If he wants to continue.

Are you Mrs Dacre? :o

Nancy66 · 14/10/2013 22:50

No, not Mrs D. Thank god.

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:53

They did not stand alone against New Labour. The Telegraph were always sceptical, as were the Mirror, and the Guardian. And don't forget the Express.

And the gold? Ha ! Everyone sold gold at the time.

PetiteRaleuse · 14/10/2013 22:54

:o I knew you weren't nancy was just joking. Urgh. Can you imagine? Needs a whole new emoticon :o

Original poster
claig · 14/10/2013 22:56

I mentioned the Labour funding scandal when the only paper that had the open goal on its front page was the Mail. After that, I never quite took the Telegraph as seriously again.

OP posts: