Am In So Much Pain. Is It Because I'm A...
Body & Soul9 mins ago
Why do they hate the Daily Mail?
44 Answers
Why do some hate the Daily Mail with such vigor?
It is just another newspaper nothing more nothing less, except to say, for whatever reason it is one of the most popular newspapers in Britain.
Could it be that in this age of looking over one's shoulder before saying anything, it will report on most things no matter how sensitive the story may be. Perhaps this is the reason, they wish to muffle items that don't fit in with their agenda?
It is the same reason that they hate me, we are not afraid to speak out. Others don't like this for some reason, and Just as they would like me off this site, they would also wish to have the Daily Mail banned, reminiscent of Nazi Germany or Stalin's Russia.
But short of having us banned, has it never occurred to them, that they have a free choice, not to read the Daily Mail or my posts, simple as that.
It is just another newspaper nothing more nothing less, except to say, for whatever reason it is one of the most popular newspapers in Britain.
Could it be that in this age of looking over one's shoulder before saying anything, it will report on most things no matter how sensitive the story may be. Perhaps this is the reason, they wish to muffle items that don't fit in with their agenda?
It is the same reason that they hate me, we are not afraid to speak out. Others don't like this for some reason, and Just as they would like me off this site, they would also wish to have the Daily Mail banned, reminiscent of Nazi Germany or Stalin's Russia.
But short of having us banned, has it never occurred to them, that they have a free choice, not to read the Daily Mail or my posts, simple as that.
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.
-- answer removed --
redhelen
Well thank you for your reassurance, but you must admit some are very offensive towards me.
/// they are to be frank sometimes down right racist.///
I agree some of my posts are frank, but there is nothing wrong in being frank, it is much better than covering things up, that should be aired.
As for being racist, this is the usual remark, (that as now been over played) when one dares to criticise immigration, blacks, Muslims (which are not a race) and other ethnic minorities.
If I made a truly racist remark, I am sure that the ED would soon ban me.
Well thank you for your reassurance, but you must admit some are very offensive towards me.
/// they are to be frank sometimes down right racist.///
I agree some of my posts are frank, but there is nothing wrong in being frank, it is much better than covering things up, that should be aired.
As for being racist, this is the usual remark, (that as now been over played) when one dares to criticise immigration, blacks, Muslims (which are not a race) and other ethnic minorities.
If I made a truly racist remark, I am sure that the ED would soon ban me.
I agree with Wickerman. I read it in the middle of the night at work to keep me awake although I don`t buy it. There are some good articles. I like the moneymail and the health pages and reviews. I just don`t like their style of reporting though. They scaremonger, twist facts and report half truths. I know for a fact they make up quotes as well.
237SJ
/// I just don`t like their style of reporting though. They scaremonger, twist facts and report half truths. I know for a fact they make up quotes as well. ///
Maybe, maybe not, some of these things are your personal dislikes, but it doesn't mean that others should be lampooned, criticised, bullied etc into not reading it, or raising some of the issues they have investigated.
/// I just don`t like their style of reporting though. They scaremonger, twist facts and report half truths. I know for a fact they make up quotes as well. ///
Maybe, maybe not, some of these things are your personal dislikes, but it doesn't mean that others should be lampooned, criticised, bullied etc into not reading it, or raising some of the issues they have investigated.
It's because of the way they target certain groups and literally run story after story until those who don't come into daily contact with those groups start to believe the Mail spin.
Also, the constant "It's so unfair" (reminiscent of Harry Enfield's Kevin the Teenage character) that some find grating.
Also, the Mail has a habit of editorialising it's news content. It's quite 'adjective heavy'. Rather than speaking to its readership in unbiased terms, it will take a story and couch it in language designed to elicit a specific response. That in itself is no bad thing when you're reading an opinion piece or a columnist, but its simply bad writing when it leeches into news output.
Also, the constant "It's so unfair" (reminiscent of Harry Enfield's Kevin the Teenage character) that some find grating.
Also, the Mail has a habit of editorialising it's news content. It's quite 'adjective heavy'. Rather than speaking to its readership in unbiased terms, it will take a story and couch it in language designed to elicit a specific response. That in itself is no bad thing when you're reading an opinion piece or a columnist, but its simply bad writing when it leeches into news output.
It is very easy to disect a Mail report, and often when you do, you find distortion, exaggeration, manipulated figures and occassionally, untruths. The Mail has a rightwing agenda and I do not.
I am sure people of a right wing bent think it is wonderful because it confirms their views. To the rest of us, that comes over as hysterical, sanctimonious, small minded, bigotted, and uncaring.
That is why people lampoon the Daily Mail (such as the song below) and why people laugh at the parodies. We don't hate its readers, we just find them gullible.
I am sure AOG would say the same about an avid 'Morning Star' reader.
I am sure people of a right wing bent think it is wonderful because it confirms their views. To the rest of us, that comes over as hysterical, sanctimonious, small minded, bigotted, and uncaring.
That is why people lampoon the Daily Mail (such as the song below) and why people laugh at the parodies. We don't hate its readers, we just find them gullible.
I am sure AOG would say the same about an avid 'Morning Star' reader.
A brilliantly accurate summary of why some people feel antipathy to the Mail...couldn't have summarized it better myself:
http://www.mailwatch....tegory/sex-sexuality/
http://www.mailwatch....tegory/sex-sexuality/
/// This may be the cry of a jaded left wing ranter, with an over developed sense of justice, and handwringing tendencies.///
I question the 'over developed sense of justice', that can only be a figment of his imagination.
But the 'cry of a jaded left wing ranter', I couldn't have put it better myself.
The rest of what this rather ignorant person says in his blog, is complete fabrication, and if one reads through it, it about sums up the points that I have tried raise.
Yes he got it right when he said "This 'may be' the cry of a jaded left wing ranter", only I would substitute 'may be' to read 'is'.
I question the 'over developed sense of justice', that can only be a figment of his imagination.
But the 'cry of a jaded left wing ranter', I couldn't have put it better myself.
The rest of what this rather ignorant person says in his blog, is complete fabrication, and if one reads through it, it about sums up the points that I have tried raise.
Yes he got it right when he said "This 'may be' the cry of a jaded left wing ranter", only I would substitute 'may be' to read 'is'.
Gromit
/// I am sure AOG would say the same about an avid 'Morning Star' reader.///
I certainly would not, although I may enter into debate arguing the points that are opposite to my own, just as I would expect others to politely argue their corner.
But I would never criticise what a person reads, only when it is a publication that the person has been criticising others for reading.
/// I am sure AOG would say the same about an avid 'Morning Star' reader.///
I certainly would not, although I may enter into debate arguing the points that are opposite to my own, just as I would expect others to politely argue their corner.
But I would never criticise what a person reads, only when it is a publication that the person has been criticising others for reading.
