daily mail fail to tell the truth..

[kinkajou2]

..Shock Horror!!
Last night @21:00 hrs - The Daily Fail carried a story on their website
(for 30 mins) that Amanda Knoxs appeal had failed.It went on to state
that the Prosecutors were happy that the trail verdict was upheld,but
when interviewed a Prosecutor regretted the"Human factor" of two
young people going back to prison....??!!....Oh Dear!!

[youngmafbog]

No doubt both stories were written in advance. Wrong one was posted.

[emmie]

this has already been covered, and yes i would imagine that all papers would write a guilty/not guilty cover, so someone got trigger happy and posted wrong one.

[bibblebub]

But it wasn't just a headline, they made up quotes and reported actions that did not happen - see here: http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/

[DTCwordfan]

Standard practice - its also called spin.

[jno]

no doubt they were. However, the one posted was full of things that didn't happen (such as Knox's reaction to the verdict, the prosecutor's interview etc).

So the Mail just made it up, eh? This will shock aog to his very core. In fact when I interviewed him on the subject he said: "This is outrageous! I will switch to reading the Independent at once!"

[jno]

it's not called spin, spin is about overlooking some facts in favour of others.

Making the facts up is called "lying".

[columbus]

No it's called JOURNALISM

[joggerjayne]

Some people (eg. me) are a bit cynical about what they read in the papers, because papers tend to have some sort of agenda.

Other people (eg. most Daily Mail readers) believe whatever is printed.

I'm sure the Daily Mail's readership will be happy to put it dowm to " just one of those things" , and continue in their unfailing loyalty to the newspaper.

But they should bear in mind ... if the false information that the Mail publishes about such an important issue is " just one of those things" , then almost anything that the Mial publishes about anything at all could also be " just one of those things" .

As to the suggestion that this is just "journalism" ... if that is the case, why do we bother buying newspapers ?

[emmie]

I doubt most people who read the mail think that everything in it is true, no more than the reporting in The Times, Independant or any other paper. There are other news outlets, tv, radio, and even then you don't believe everything you hear. I can only go on my own experiences, for example if i saw a robbery and related that info to a policeman, what's the chances of getting something wrong, every likelihood.

[Quizmonster]

The Daily Mail was described over a century ago by an ex-Prime Minister - Robert Cecil (Tory!) - as "a newspaper written by office-boys for office-boys."
I know there is an occasional bright office-boy, but - by and large - it has since revealed a standard of intelligence no higher than the average of these amongst its staff and readers.
Why would anything about it surprise us?

[rojash]

"if i saw a robbery and related that info to a policeman, what's the chances of getting something wrong, every likelihood. "
You seem to be missing the point em10.
What the DM did was NOT see the robbery, but claimed it had, and then invented the info.