Why is the Daily Mail so hated on here?

[NAB3]

What does it do that is so wrong?

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

what is all this 'know the enemy' business?

Sounds like Citizen Smith lol

POWER TO THE PEEPALLLLL!!!!!!

Can't see why PCmum is a hypocrite.... nothing she has said is even vaguely hypocritical tbh!

"What does it do that is so wrong?"

Runs headlines like "Abortion hope after ?gay genes? find"

To know the enemy means to know what the women-hating, gay-hating, black-hating idiots are wittering on about now so that you can crush their bigoted views easily.

PMSL MM

Aelita - the DM has never acknowledged the wrongness of its position in the 1930s, so your analogy with anti-German feeling now doesn't work. The predominant sentiment in Germany about the Nazi period is contrition. I don't see why it's "odd" to feel angry at a great evil that happened in the past and that the DM has never acknowledged. Surely it's much odder to consign that period to a Blairite let's-move-on memory hole?

Christy I applaud you.

I've never heard such sweeping generalisations & judgements in my life, and such hatred over something as innocuous as a paper!

Live & let live, there are some really interesting people on MN from all walks of life. I might disagree with many & agree with a few but it's always interesting to hear others points of view & agree to diasgree on occasion.

Such hatred & vitriol is quite sad from supposedly tolerant people.

It seems completely unreasonable to judge a newspaper on its support of someone who was around SEVENTY YEARS AGO.

The same criticism could be leveled at The Guardian for its support in the 1930s and 40s of a dictator who killed more people even than Hitler--Stalin.

Actually, I don't think it's true to say that the (Manchester) Guardian uncritically supported Stalin in the 1930's Eliza2. Sorry. Malcolm Muggeridge travelled to the Soviet Union and reported back on the purges and famine, much to the fury of some Left-wingers who accepted uncritically the line that Stalin was a lovely chap doing great good for his country. Gosh, I don't know why I'm writing this. I'm a die-hard hardline right-winger by default because I sometime read articles in the DM so I shouldn't really be giving the Grauniad any quarter .

Message withdrawn

Sorry if it's already in here but did anyone see it on Sunday? The new Lis Jones column banging on about what a waste to society mothers are and how we spend our £250 lump sum on 'exotic holidays' etc. How working mothers run home "on the dot of six" leaving her to do all the work.
Twitter & Bisted anyone?

Fair point about MM, aelita (thank God he had vision)--though other Guardian journalists were less perceptive.

Well, Muggeridge published anonymously and I've read somewhere that it was rather at odds with general editorial policy, but more than that I don't know.

This thread has reminded me of an incident at my very true-blue school (CofE convent) in the 80's. The Mail and the Independent were bought in every day (the latter very unwillingly) and I was found reading an article about Kinnock in the Indy by an elderly, stongly Thatcherite nun (she taught us 'current affairs' - her classes were hardly a hotbed of debate; all she wanted to talk about was Mrs T and her lovely blue frocks ). I was roundly berated and directed to an article about the Royals in the DM & told in no uncertain terms to read instead. I thought 'fuck you, I hate Thatcher, I'm not interested in the Royals and I'll read what I damn well please' but phrased it rather more politely.

So it's funny now that the prevailing political consensus on MN (yes, I agree with others that there is one & I think it's rather shouty) holds that anyone who even so much as picks up the Mail is bigoted, racist, etc etc and should apparently be deported according to one poster, I still think 'fuck you, I'll read what I damn well please'. Only now I can swear out loud as it were.

And anyway, why doesn't anyone seem to get all worked up about the Express? It's 10x worse...

chirsty wisty, i am waiting for you to tell me why i am a hypocrite?!
i'm, being straight with you, i promise i don't actually vote UKIP/BNP!

I am not actually against people reading the Daily Mail I'm not intolerant of views different to my own in any way, but I absolutely and utterly will criticse it, debate its contents, judge it, mock it, jeer at it, and generally think ' o what is that loo roll doing in the newspaper section?'

do the fervently anti-immigrant contents of the DM not offend you?

wow, what exotic holiday costs £250? i want to go!

i looked up 3 days in centre parks in feb half term and its about £500! hardly luxury (tho i do completely love it actually!) and a lot more than £250!

perhaps she is thinking about lots of pregnant people going backwards and forwards on delayed ryanair flights that cost 1p at the start, but by the time you have paid all the extras - a seat, some fuel, a pilot, etc, it gets you up to a nice round £249.99!

Is that what she means?

defo bisted and twitter.

silly cow

I mainly despise, rather than hate the dm for its terrible, dishonest journalism. When you read an article in the dm, they will often miss out really important facts, or slant them in a disingenuous way to deliberately imply something for their own political agenda, which is simply not there in the original story. You only need to read the article about the same story in the Telegraph, Times, Spectator or other right wing publication, ot see that.

That is OK, if you are doing an opinion piece or a polemic. If you are purporting to be reporting the news, then it is abysmally dishonest journalism and it brings the whole profession into disrepute. It does its readers a disservice by not reporting the full truth as best it can, and it is cynical and wrong. Hating the DM it seems to me, has nothing to do with its political stance - the Telegraph is far more right wing than the DM in many ways, and it is a good newspaper - it is to do with the DM's shockingly cynical approach to journalism. I know it sounds a bit pompous, but when I think of really brave journalists in parts of the world who risk their lives to get the truth out to people (and it really does happen, you only have to look at the Rory Peck awards to see how dangerous it can be to be a journalist in some place), I just can't help feeling that the cynical manipulation of the news is a real betrayal of journalism, tbf. And that's mainly why I find the DM disgusting, not because of its politics. HTH.

The Daily Mail has big news today. There's a "credit card" crisis

PMSL
Hope they don't correct that headline too quickly. They clearly have a great understanding of the current crisis...

I despise the DM's misogynism and bigotry (like everyone else said).

But I HATE it for its sheer distortion and lies. I know quite a few press officers and without exception they agree that a DM journalist, given the facts of a case, will ignore them completely - not even presenting them as an argument - and write what they wanted to anyway.

Contemptible.

Agree that you cant pigeonhole people for what they read - I sometimes pick up the DM to see how the otherside think/if Im in the mood for a light read of a barmy paper.

What bothers me is that some people actually believe this stuff and take it seriously. DH's family read it, its taken as honest reporting cue lots of excruciating comments about immigrants/women these days etc. Although funniest was MIL complaining about "these eastern european immigrants swamping us" when she herself is German and has lived here for 30 years!

Hmm, why do you automatically assume that everything printed in the DM is a lie?

Could it be that it simply doesn't fit in with your world view ... that it is merely reporting the same, or the available facts, but from a different angle?