Technology2 mins ago
Should We Be Grateful To Such Newspapers As The Daily Mail?
60 Answers
Is it advantageous for national newspapers such as the Daily Mail to report on various stories which for some strange reason other papers fail to report on?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
sp1814
Do you know sp that I have never looked at any of those things, such as 'teenage girls who are (allegedly) 'all grown up' or even 'Kim Kashadian and their brood'. whoever they are.
So I bow to your experience and knowledge of such things, which seems to say more about your choice of articles that you must read in the Daily Mail than those of mine.
Do you know sp that I have never looked at any of those things, such as 'teenage girls who are (allegedly) 'all grown up' or even 'Kim Kashadian and their brood'. whoever they are.
So I bow to your experience and knowledge of such things, which seems to say more about your choice of articles that you must read in the Daily Mail than those of mine.
mikey4444
There you go with your unhealthy obsession regarding Muslims.
You are prepared to congratulate the DM for it's campaign at getting some of the the killers of Stephen Lawrence behind bars, him being a black lad and his killers white, but you think that if he had been a Muslim, they would have ignored it?
Pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
Still haven't answered my question, are you a closeted Muslim?
There you go with your unhealthy obsession regarding Muslims.
You are prepared to congratulate the DM for it's campaign at getting some of the the killers of Stephen Lawrence behind bars, him being a black lad and his killers white, but you think that if he had been a Muslim, they would have ignored it?
Pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
Still haven't answered my question, are you a closeted Muslim?
sp1814
/// Why do feel the need to defend the Daily Mail? ///
Simply because the liberal left would like it closed down, and if they are against anything then a 'right' minded person has to defend it.
And why would they wish to censor it, (well we are now back to the reason for my thread) because they are prepared to inform the masses of what is really happening, not some PC doctoring of certain facts, which the left would wish to see swept under the carpet.
/// Why do feel the need to defend the Daily Mail? ///
Simply because the liberal left would like it closed down, and if they are against anything then a 'right' minded person has to defend it.
And why would they wish to censor it, (well we are now back to the reason for my thread) because they are prepared to inform the masses of what is really happening, not some PC doctoring of certain facts, which the left would wish to see swept under the carpet.
AOG - Whether the Mail has a mission to 'inform the masses' or not - I suggest that 'the masses' don't actually read it!
I know that it is the most popular daily paper, but in an era of declining print media, that really isn't saying that much.
I think the Mail has its demographic, to which it successfully appeals, but they are not 'the masses' by a very long way.
I know that it is the most popular daily paper, but in an era of declining print media, that really isn't saying that much.
I think the Mail has its demographic, to which it successfully appeals, but they are not 'the masses' by a very long way.
AOG
"Simply because the liberal left would like it closed down"
Not true.
And with regards to censorship - it's absolutely right that occasionally the DM should be censored.
Why, only recently it had to pay out an undisclosed sum for printing a story telling its readers that the First Lady of the United States used to be a hooker.
So, in some respects, censorship should be encouraged, don't you think?
Otherwise, it can be expensive.
Your defence of the Daily Mail is really quite odd. Again - the Guardian is slated all the time on this site, but you never get any of the (sigh) 'liberal left' crying about it.
If we did, we'd be called snowflakes.
"Simply because the liberal left would like it closed down"
Not true.
And with regards to censorship - it's absolutely right that occasionally the DM should be censored.
Why, only recently it had to pay out an undisclosed sum for printing a story telling its readers that the First Lady of the United States used to be a hooker.
So, in some respects, censorship should be encouraged, don't you think?
Otherwise, it can be expensive.
Your defence of the Daily Mail is really quite odd. Again - the Guardian is slated all the time on this site, but you never get any of the (sigh) 'liberal left' crying about it.
If we did, we'd be called snowflakes.
But to your earlier point regarding the DM's obsession with teenage girls and the Kardashian clan. I accept you have never read any of those stories.
I think you're lucky, because you have a very well developed selection ability, which allows you to focus on some stories, whilst others are invisible to you.
I assume that when you read the Mail, instead of seeing a full webpage, you just see stories with the rest of your screen being out of focus.
It must be like having news glaucoma.
I think you're lucky, because you have a very well developed selection ability, which allows you to focus on some stories, whilst others are invisible to you.
I assume that when you read the Mail, instead of seeing a full webpage, you just see stories with the rest of your screen being out of focus.
It must be like having news glaucoma.
I confess that I m surprised that you don't read the print edition of the Mail AOG - how on earth you manage to ignore that appalling sexist tripe that makes up their side-bar is beyond me. Even if you occasionally flick your eyes to the right, you are greeted with 'side-boobs' and 'rippling abs' and 'pert bottoms' and similar sub-1974 sexist guff.
