I see Daily Mail links posted here a lot for a source

[traceyracer]

Just going to leave this here

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46976834

Microsoft Edge has been (since last Aug) warning its users who visit the Daily Mail's website to "proceed with caution: this website generally fails to maintain basic standards of accuracy and accountability"

I rather suspect it's because they're used to interacting on Twitter, where blocking is almost reflex for some people

I imagine that's why transactivists last about five seconds on here. They simply can't form a logical argument, nor can they stop themselves from breaking talk guidelines.

If they hate mumsnet so much and think we are overly influential, you'd think they'd come on here, en masse, and put their argument forward.

I used to think it's because they didn't want to draw attention to the site, but now I realise it's only because they have no argument.

Although I still think they make a huge mistake in signposting everyone to us on the basis of their own prejudice.

Unfortunately for the role I work in, which they cover quite a lot, they often have stories a day before the decent papers, in more detail and accurately. It kills me, but I go on it for that reason.

Pombear, my Father did this with me. He also took me to the library every week and persuaded the librarian to let me read more adult books than an 8 year old usually would. It has stood me in good stead in interpreting the news. He would have loved the internet.

The Mail covers stories about domestic violence and violence against and abuse of children which other papers don't.

I agree, Marguerita.

Raises a glass to pombear’s dad.

I know there is much discussion about children and young people being digital natives. My experience has been that while children are very good at finding material, they’re pretty shite at making critical assessments about the material they find.

In a world where a major Australian political scandal was broken by the New Idea of all sources, I’ll take my facts from the people willing to report them.

It's fascinating in terms of human nature, I think. And I'm using fascinating in a genuine sense there, rather than in the way I do often use it here which is short hand for "showed your petticoat there, love."

It's very fashionable even still, among certain people, to scorn the DM, and I do suspect that's because they are actually scorning the people they perceive to be 'the kind of people that read the DM'. Which has all sorts of connotations wrt class and privilege, tbh.

I'm not a cheerleader for the paper, but it presents a certain editorial point of view and yes, will mock drunken women on NYE as much as it carry news about violence against women and children.

But I can't think of a mainstream newspaper or outlet without fault because people are a very complicated mix of good bad and our media reflects that. If you sit there and think that your news sources are all very sound and that you don't have weaknesses and blind spots to the exact same degree as every other human in our society, you're kidding yourself.

pombear's dad should be teaching media and critical thinking at Goldsmiths.

He can tag team with my dad who even now loves watching debates and politics where lots of different views are represented because he says you learn nothing only listening to one voice, and laments that it's becoming harder to find decent debate anywhere.

I do smile at the Daily Mail hatchet pieces that they deliberately frame as being fawning towards the people involved. They are masters at this.

Like the drag queens doing the BDSM calendar for Mermaids, the transgender charity for children.

linky

The piece was ostensibly gushingly positive towards both the drag queens themselves and Mermaids. The journalist made sure that BDSM and Mermaids was very firmly linked in the minds of the readers, with lots of sexualised pictures accompanying the article. It was very neatly done.

Of course Mermaids loved the article and retweeted it.

My late grandfather could do lectures on how to burst a blood vessel ranting at the TV about Thatcher. He was the first person to show me passion about politics. I still remember my grandmother patting his hand and saying "that women will be the death of you Jack".

Funny how all is man-haters love these men so much

I do smile at the Daily Mail hatchet pieces that they deliberately frame as being fawning towards the people involved.

Like this one from a couple of days ago.

is that the one we're not allowed to discuss, OldCrone?

is that the one we're not allowed to discuss

I don't know about that. I'm not discussing it, anyway. I just thought I'd "leave it here", as the OP said.

Didn't everyone do the exercise with the newspapers (described above by a pp) in like year 7 or something?

It's something I've done throughout my life - read lots of different papers/ books and viewpoints. Does seem odd that somehow we need to be spoon feed the 'correct' groupthink rather than being allowed to evaluate sources ourselves.

And the sneering about the DM (including on here) is very class based I think.

I ended up turning to Breitbart FFS after the Cologne attacks

It’s sad that important issues are getting
covered by right-wing media because they are too controversial for everyone else. We cede so much of the conversation this way;
If DM and Breitbart are the only ones that will cover trans issues and rape gangs, then they get to frame the debate unfortunately

Proceed with caution" is advice which should be applied to any source of information.

Absolutely. In the olden days we were taught to read everything and think about bias, history, perspective and to think critically. We read primary texts by 'bad' people in order to see what they thought about themselves.
And what and how they tried to persuade others to think, I would add.

Excellent post, MrsTerry!

So true.

X-post looking like I'm agreeing with me being quoted! I was agreeing with @PineapplePower !

Yes, like that one OldCrone.

Here's another belter.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5565999/Row-female-compartments-transgender-people-pits-Churchills-grandson-against-Mumsnet.html

The one above was where the Caledonian Sleeper opened its overnight female-only accommodation to any bloke who claims to be a woman. The Daily Mail reported on how a lot of people on Mumsnet were unhappy about this. Fine.

Then the article veered off into covering remarks by Sophia Botha, a male transgender person who once took a selfie with Jeremy Corbyn. Botha remarked that it is justified to punch women if they do not agree that men who claim to be women actually are women.

The article is thus triumphantly concluded with a large insert entitled Corbyn ally urges: 'Thump a feminist.

Classic Daily Mail.

I was helped tremendously by a Christian apologist some years ago now. I don't agree with him on a number of issues, and our politics and approach to much, probably including whether gender is innate, because he's more conservative than I am.

But he is chock full of integrity, and does lots of debates, primarily religious theology topics. He takes time to completely understand the views of the people he disagrees with, because he knows that if you go into a discussion without understanding exactly what your opponent believes, and why they believe it, you will look and be a fool.

That approach is as rare as hens teeth nowadays. There's a reason all sorts of things get linked here, be they kiwifarms or the DM, or articles written by transactivists. It's because a large proportion of the women here are invested in finding out about things as the actually are, and why people believe things and what motivates them from all sides, and talking about the consequences of those things and beliefs.

tracey

Two points.

1. It’s important to read a range of media. If you only get your news from the mail, or the guardian, or the morning star, you’re only getting one spin, one view. When you read a range of media, you will get multiple angles in the same story. This increases your chances of getting a clearer picture but it also shows you how each outlet presents a story and this is often as informative as the story itself.

1. You don’t get to tell me what to read. I will read mumsnet. I will read the mail, I will read the guardian. I will read anything I want. I will be aware of the slant /bias/ agenda of where I read it. And I will come to my own conclusions.

Pombear fab idea well done your dad

The Daily Mail reporting on Sophia Botha was excellent. From having the ear of the Labour leadership they are now irrelevant and tweeting away into the void with barely a single like .

It starts with education in schools. When I went to school decades ago in the South East my education was pretty broad I like to think. Dad was transferred to Wales during O levels, suddenly, history, geography, was all about Lloyd George, coal/slate mines Welsh mountains. To say I was in shock was an understatement.

My friends daughter who transferred to a USA school aged 14 had the same culture shock. The USA history/geography/english language she had been taught in the UK was part of a broad international syllabus over there in the mid west, USA was the only country worth exploring, it was the be all and end all.

We need to teach our children to question everything not learn it rote style as the gospel according to....???

So OP did the mic drop thing and ran?

That's just bait. Poor show .