Is the Daily Mail really that bad?

Plankton1

The Daily Mail's morally outraged tone in every single article sometimes leaves me laughing. Their headlines for the "Femail" section have to be seen to be believed.
The prissy, condescending tone is hilarious -

"Are thigh high boots REALLY appropriate for the school run, Elle?" (Elle McPhearson dropping her kid to school wearing boots over jeans)
"What on EARTH is she doing to that hotdog? A bit x-rated for the basketball court, Leann?" (Leann Rimes innocently eating a hotdog at a basketball match)
"More flab than fab. So and So tries new trend and FAILS miserably" (some starlet in an unflattering outfit)

Bitchy.....

dr.bollocko

The daily mail's popularity stems from its large female readership as a result of it being the first to target the female market with women only magazine and it's fluffy celeb coverage.
Statistically its female readership is the highest in the UK.

This has much more to do with its popularity than it's political agenda (which, lets face it, it is entitled to have) or it's ability to "talk about issues the silent majority (LOLOLOL) wants to talk about but can't because of the PC leftie papers" IE make up stuff / mud sling / court controversy by lazily trolling the world.

token101

Rockery Woman wrote: »

The Mail is Right Wing, the Sun is thrash, the Star is garbage,the Mirror is ****e, the Indo is lies...



What will I read now??? Any left-wing rags out there worth a gander????

If you like pious and preachy left wing columnists the Irish Times is well worth a look. Not as openly inciteful as the Daily Mail, but they're fairly insidious in their reporting at times. You need only look at their recent conduct with the PR company to see that.

The only paper I've ever read that I felt even attempted impartiality was The Guardian in UK. And they have their moments too.

Mike 1972

Given their hatred of all things European I was kinda suprised to spot the Daily Mail on sale last time I was in Berlin.

I thought the local market for that kind of thing kinda dried up in 1945 ?

KeithAFC wrote: »

We don't live in a perfect world. These people need to make up stories to sell papers and earn money.

I find it hilarious that anyone would defend the practice of newspapers (whether their political orientation happens to be) making up stories

chasm

Priori wrote: »

I noticed a comment referring to the Indo as the 'Irish Daily Mail.'
my question is: Is the Daily Mail bad enough that a comparison with the Indo is warranted?

Well i was reading the Martin Sheen article on the Indo website earlier about his episode in the US version of "Who do you think you are?" written by Brian Hutton and then i read the exact same, word for word article on the Daily Mail website, written by "daily mail reporter" lol so i think it's warranted if they even print the same articles

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/hollywood-actor-martin-sheen-enormously-proud-of-uncles-ira-past-3009731.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2096187/Martin-Sheens-pride-discovering-uncles-IRA-past-Who-Do-You-Think-You-Are.html

Son Of A Vidic

Is the Daily Mail really that bad?



Worse actually.

Batsy

mathepac wrote: »

Yes, in answer to your question; both are involved in a rush to the bottom, journalistically.

In fact, it's the opposite. This whole thread is about the fact that the Daily Mail is going up in the world, not down.

Batsy

K-9 wrote: »

Yep it's popular, but the Times, the English Independent and the Guardian would be the respected choices for news and politics, even sports. The Mail and the S*n for entertainment and womens stuff

If that's the case then The Grauniad, like The Daily Mail, would be in the Top 100 most-read newspapers on the planet, but it isn't.

Batsy

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Curiously, the Irish Daily Mail's figures have been appalling since their launch a few years ago - the worst of all the dailies in fact despite a lower price and a plethora of deals giving away free tat:

It's not curious. The reason for The Daily Mail doing worse in Ireland than in the Uk is because, generally, the Irish are more left-wing in their outlook than the British.

Batsy

Mike 1972 wrote: »

WTF ?

Somebody is talking through their vagina :rolleyes:

I'm sorry to disappoint you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_world_by_circulation

I got the numbers wrong but The Sun is the ninth most popular newspaper on the planet, with a circulation of almost 3 million.

Nodin

Batsy wrote: »

If that's the case then The Grauniad, like The Daily Mail, would be in the Top 100 most-read newspapers on the planet, but it isn't.

You still haven't explained how quality is reliably indicated by quantity.

Batsy

Nodin wrote: »

You still haven't explained how quality is reliably indicated by quantity.

I don't think most people want to read a crap newspaper.

They want to read a good, high-quality newspaper, like The Sun or The Daily Mail. Those papers aren't just popular due to their journalistic quality they are also popular because the political and social views they hold are the politcal and social views that the ordinary man and woman in the British street hold. THAT is what makes them popular. The British people just don't want to read left-wing newspaper like The Guardian (which is so famous for its spelling mistakes that its nickname is The Grauniad, due to the fact that that is what is once accidentally called itself on its front cover) which, with their silly left-wing views, is only read by trendy lefties in areas like Islington and so cannot compete with newspapers like The Sun and The Daily Mail which are read by the ordinary person all over the country.

Dudess

The Guardian is biased at times but at least its content involves brain use.

RichieC

Batsy wrote: »

Nodin wrote: »

You still haven't explained how quality is reliably indicated by quantity.

I don't think most people want to read a crap newspaper.

They want to read a good, high-quality newspaper, like The Sun or The Daily Mail. Those papers aren't just popular due to their journalistic quality they are also popular because the political and social views they hold are the politcal and social views that the ordinary man and woman in the British street hold. THAT is what makes them popular. The British people just don't want to read left-wing newspaper like The Guardian (which is so famous for its spelling mistakes that its nickname is The Grauniad, due to the fact that that is what is once accidentally called itself on its front cover) which, with their silly left-wing views, is only read by trendy lefties in areas like Islington and so cannot compete with newspapers like The Sun and The Daily Mail which are reas by the ordinary person all over the country.

Jesus tap dancing christ.. Have we as a species really fallen this far? Does this guy really represent a majority in england? if so its no wonder the arse fell out of their empire...

Dudess

Nah England is a great country - I do not believe he is representative of it in general. Every rose has its thorns.

The King of Moo

Batsy wrote: »

I don't think most people want to read a crap newspaper.

They want to read a good, high-quality newspaper, like The Sun or The Daily Mail. Those papers aren't just popular due to their journalistic quality they are also popular because the political and social views they hold are the politcal and social views that the ordinary man and woman in the British street hold. THAT is what makes them popular. The British people just don't want to read left-wing newspaper like The Guardian (which is so famous for its spelling mistakes that its nickname is The Grauniad, due to the fact that that is what is once accidentally called itself on its front cover) which, with their silly left-wing views, is only read by trendy lefties in areas like Islington and so cannot compete with newspapers like The Sun and The Daily Mail which are read by the ordinary person all over the country.

Surely you must be aware (especially as you seem to know something about the Guardian) that much, if not all of the tabloids' success is due to their sensationalising of stories, and at times completely making things up or deliberately taking up populist issues even if it contradicts previous stances on such issues, or even their take on the issue in a different market (as seen in the links provided in this thread).

They're read by "the ordinary people" as they very cynically provide what they think their readers want, regardless of whether it's accurate or even true.

And because of all the tits.

People love tits.

RichieC

Youll never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Capt'n Midnight

Batsy wrote: »

I'm sorry to disappoint you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_world_by_circulation

I got the numbers wrong but The Sun is the ninth most popular newspaper on the planet, with a circulation of almost 3 million.

Which goes to show that newspapers are dying out.

Though oddly enough not the sun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation has been at three million odd since the 1970's while most other papers have fallen by half in the same time. Maybe people buy it for reasons other than reading the news ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Batsy wrote: »

It's not curious. The reason for The Daily Mail doing worse in Ireland than in the Uk is because, generally, the Irish are more left-wing in their outlook than the British.

You've obviously never been to Ireland. If we were left-wing in our outlook, we woudln't have two right wing parties taking it in turns to be elected by right-wing voters and **** is in the ass with right-wing policies.

The post popular papers in Ireland are still tabloids, just not the one you support.

Batsy wrote: »

I don't think most people want to read a crap newspaper.

They want to read a good, high-quality newspaper, like The Sun or The Daily Mail. Those papers aren't just popular due to their journalistic quality they are also popular because the political and social views they hold are the politcal and social views that the ordinary man and woman in the British street hold. THAT is what makes them popular. The British people just don't want to read left-wing newspaper like The Guardian (which is so famous for its spelling mistakes that its nickname is The Grauniad, due to the fact that that is what is once accidentally called itself on its front cover) which, with their silly left-wing views, is only read by trendy lefties in areas like Islington and so cannot compete with newspapers like The Sun and The Daily Mail which are read by the ordinary person all over the country.

It's like the playground: people want to be entertained, not educated, and the most popular kids in the class are never the most intelligent.

The man and the woman in the street hold the viewpoints the papers TELL them to hold (mainly through fear) and they want to read about Justi Bieber, Beyonce and Manchester United and not the polical situations in other countries, cultral events or econmic policies. That is why the papers you list are popular.

Don;t get me wrong: what the tabloids do they do vey well, "it" just not happening to be factual informative journalism.

mikom

Batsy wrote: »

This has nothing to do with The Sun. This is about The Daily Mail.

However, The Sun is the 9th biggest selling newspaper on Earth, with a circulation of almost 3 billion, and is the world's second-biggest-selling English language newspaper after The Times of India.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

WTF ?

Somebody is talking through their vagina :rolleyes:

mikom wrote: »

The newspaper with the largest circulation in the world is Japanese and it barely tips 15 million.
So I don't know where you pulled that figure out of.
You do understand that circulation refers to an average day?

Batsy wrote: »

I got the numbers wrong .

Only by 2.997 billion.
*Future posts to be filed under dubious*

Dudess wrote: »

Nah England is a great country - I do not believe he is representative of it in general. Every rose has its thorns.

Just like every night has it's dawn
Just like every cowboy sings his sad, sad song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c56vEgA4fjU

Nodin

Batsy wrote: »

I don't think most people want to read a crap newspaper.

They want to read a good, high-quality newspaper, like The Sun or The Daily Mail. Those papers aren't just popular due to their journalistic quality .

.....popular in spite of their journalistic "quality" is closer to the truth of it. Pandering to what people want is not a sign of quality, nor is going against the grain for the sake of it.

The mail sells because it knows its audience and tells them what they want to hear and shows them what they want to see.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

mikom wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c56vEgA4fjU

Ok, now I've got Otto from the Simpsons stuck in heaad, thank you vey much for that!

K-9

Batsy wrote: »

If that's the case then The Grauniad, like The Daily Mail, would be in the Top 100 most-read newspapers on the planet, but it isn't.

I don't think you got my point. The Daily Mail is the X Factor of papers.

It's like saying the X Factor is way better than QI because loads more people watch it! Makes no sense what so ever!

But it isn't going to sink in. You'll give out about the break down in society and then go on about how popular the Mail is................................................................the light bulb might switch on sometime!

dr.bollocko

K-9 wrote: »

the light bulb might switch on sometime!

What?

The immigrants are stealing free electricity again to make drugs and traffic children?

AGAIN???

Logical Fallacy

Batsy wrote: »

I don't think most people want to read a crap newspaper.

They want to read a good, high-quality newspaper, like The Sun or The Daily Mail. Those papers aren't just popular due to their journalistic quality they are also popular because the political and social views they hold are the politcal and social views that the ordinary man and woman in the British street hold. THAT is what makes them popular. The British people just don't want to read left-wing newspaper like The Guardian (which is so famous for its spelling mistakes that its nickname is The Grauniad, due to the fact that that is what is once accidentally called itself on its front cover) which, with their silly left-wing views, is only read by trendy lefties in areas like Islington and so cannot compete with newspapers like The Sun and The Daily Mail which are read by the ordinary person all over the country.

Not really, the Mail and the Sun are dribbler rags, and most people are retarded...join the dots on that one.

It likes walking into a remedial classroom that somehow has a copy of Crime and Punishment on the shelf. It will look brand new due to lack of contact, while all the simple colouring books are well thumbed and used and the crayons still litter the floor.

Does this mean the colouring books have more merit than Crime and Punishment? They clearly do to the crinkleheaded confusoids that populate the remedial class.

K-9

dr.bollocko wrote: »

What?

The immigrants are stealing free electricity again to make drugs and traffic children?

AGAIN???

Could Immigration mean high Electricity prices as swans get burned?

Daily Mail-o-matic | qwghlm.co.uk

COULD THE BBC DESTROY HOUSE PRICES?

COULD TEENAGE SEX MOLEST THE ROYAL FAMILY?

WILL TEACHERS DEVALUE YOUR HOUSE?

HAS THE LABOUR PARTY STOLEN FROM HARD-WORKING FAMILIES?

COULD HEALTH & SAFETY HURT COMMON SENSE AND DECENCY?


My Favourite:

HAS THE E.U. RUINED THE CHURCH?

The King of Moo

K-9 wrote: »

Could Immigration mean high Electricity prices as swans get burned?

Daily Mail-o-matic | qwghlm.co.uk

COULD THE BBC DESTROY HOUSE PRICES?

COULD TEENAGE SEX MOLEST THE ROYAL FAMILY?

WILL TEACHERS DEVALUE YOUR HOUSE?

HAS THE LABOUR PARTY STOLEN FROM HARD-WORKING FAMILIES?

COULD HEALTH & SAFETY HURT COMMON SENSE AND DECENCY?


My Favourite:

HAS THE E.U. RUINED THE CHURCH?

HAS THE HOUSE-PRICE CRASH GIVEN CLIFF RICHARD SWINE FLU?

Dudess

Oh my god, an anti health and safety piece - they're actually parodies of themselves...

dr.bollocko

We can mock and poke fun however people will still defend it to the hilt regardless of what a turd of a paper it is.
You can slate it from an intellectual or journalistic point of view or for its shameless bandwagon jumping but in the end the baby will have its bottle. Some people just feel comforted by knowing that the gays and immigrants are the cause of the breakdown of society and are far too interested in what colour thong paris hilton is wearing today.

At least the sun has tits.

And yet here we are posting in after hours.

K-9

dr.bollocko wrote: »

We can mock and poke fun however people will still defend it to the hilt regardless of what a turd of a paper it is.
You can slate it from an intellectual or journalistic point of view or for its shameless bandwagon jumping but in the end the baby will have its bottle. Some people just feel comforted by knowing that the gays and immigrants are the cause of the breakdown of society and are far too interested in what colour thong paris hilton is wearing today.

At least the sun has tits.

And yet here we are posting in after hours.

I do love the use of the question mark! "You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment." You just plant the thought and let people think what they want!

Very Francis Urquhart and the House of Cards, Batsy wouldn't like that BBC Political satire of Maggie and the Tories:

House of Cards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The irony is Labour just became the same, Blair and Brown, Batsy wont get that, too much into right good and left wing evil stuff!

"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment."

K-9

Dudess wrote: »

Oh my god, an anti health and safety piece - they're actually parodies of themselves...

It's a parody site Dudess but I understand why somebody would think it isn't! Over exaggeration is the best form of comedy, when it starts looking like reality...............

Dudess

K-9 wrote: »

Dudess wrote: »

Oh my god, an anti health and safety piece - they're actually parodies of themselves...

It's a parody site Dudess but I understand why somebody would think it isn't! Over exaggeration is the best form of comedy, when it starts looking like reality...............

D'oh! The wine...

Wouldn't be surprised though... :pac:

Mr Trade In

It is good for a laugh once in a while.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2096369/George-Clooney-lookalike-contest-Actor-David-Glendon-beats-782-win.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

PhlegmyMoses

Batsy wrote: »

It's not curious. The reason for The Daily Mail doing worse in Ireland than in the Uk is because, generally, the Irish are more left-wing in their outlook than the British.

And yet the Indo is our best selling newspaper.

Pj!

Mr Trade In wrote: »

It is good for a laugh once in a while.

It's all trash but their headlines are worth the read,

eg.

Here comes the Olympic torch... oh no, it's a Co-op shoplifter with a plundered bottle of rosé




It is trash but they have their place.

mikemac1

Blatently trolling their readers, they have another Samantha Brick article up

A husband who prizes your looks, not your mind is the key to a happy marriage

There you go ladies, marraige advice from the Brick

I know my place in the home – in the bedroom and kitchen I’m a consummate professional

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2147212/Samantha-Brick-Independence-A-career-Who-needs-A-husband-prizes-looks-mind-key-happy-marriage.html#ixzz1vVXI4SaI

A wimmins job is to please her husband

Reoil

Is the Daily Mail really that bad?

http://p.twimg.com/AtXtaM3CEAAvr9a.png

MetalDog

How do you confuse a Daily Mail reader?

Tell them that immigrants kill paedophiles.

kevmol88

mikemac1 wrote: »

Blatently trolling their readers, they have another Samantha Brick article up



There you go ladies, marraige advice from the Brick



A wimmins job is to please her husband

My husband sets me a £250 allowance each month for my wardrobe, I ask his permission before booking a hair appointment and discuss with him what I will have done.

He even has an opinion — which I adhere to — on how I dress and what I weigh. He prefers I wear classic ladylike attire and, at 5ft 11in, he insists I tip the scale at no more than 10½ stone. In fact, he’s there when I weigh myself.

Teyla Emmagan

I love the Daily Mail, it completely fulfills my occasional need to read rubbish. In fairness though the paper version is far less trashy than the online one, it does have the occasional bit of actual news. Though obviously I supplement it with my reading of the FT so I can't be accused of being too lowbrow.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

MetalDog wrote: »

How do you confuse a Daily Mail reader?

Tell them that immigrants kill paedophiles.

Other way round I thought...?

thebigbiffo

far as i'm concerned it's mostly the snobbish element of AH that constantly puts down the Daily Mail. every day some of the funniest, shocking and most commented on threads come from links to the 'Daily Fail' than from any other source on the net. Yes, it may be sensationalist and agenda driven - but it does what it's supposed to: encourage discourse, entertain readers and yes, to some extent, inform.

so many posters on here bitch about it and think it's puts them on some level of intelligence greater than everyone else but they miss the point: they source unique stories and present them in a manner their reader wants, they have some of the best celeb content and pics out there and their specialised channels (science, sports, money etc) are really spot on and very entertaining.

in short - we all know how 95% of boardsies are one evolutionary step above us plebs, so how about you leave us alone to be ENTERTAINED by a news source while you find a cure for cancer.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

thebigbiffo wrote: »

far as i'm concerned it's mostly the snobbish element of AH that constantly puts down the Daily Mail. every day some of the funniest, shocking and most commented on threads come from links to the 'Daily Fail' than from any other source on the net. Yes, it may be sensationalist and agenda driven - but it does what it's supposed to: encourage discourse, entertain readers and yes, to some extent, inform.

so many posters on here bitch about it and think it's puts them on some level of intelligence greater than everyone else but they miss the point: they source unique stories and present them in a manner their reader wants, they have some of the best celeb content and pics out there and their specialised channels (science, sports, money etc) are really spot on and very entertaining.

in short - we all know how 95% of boardsies are one evolutionary step above us plebs, so how about you leave us alone to be ENTERTAINED by a news source while you find a cure for cancer.

First of all, a news soruce should be infrmative not, entertaining. You want entertainment, go watch the late late show.

Second, you seem to think that such reporting is harmless fun. It is neither harlmess nor fun.

Finally, it is not that people who don;t read the Daily Mail are in some way evolutionary arvanced, it just appears that way because people who do read it have regressed.

Crooked Jack

Reoil wrote: »

Is the Daily Mail really that bad?

http://p.twimg.com/AtXtaM3CEAAvr9a.png

HA! Brilliant. My favourite example of this type of tabloid hypocrisy is from the Irish Daily Star after the News of the World shut down. They ran a front page banner with the NOTW world logo and "gone forever," stamped over it and then beside that was The Irish Sun logo with "lowlife Brit sister rag" stamped over it.
I didnt know wether to laugh or cry.

thebigbiffo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

First of all, a news soruce should be infrmative not, entertaining. You want entertainment, go watch the late late show.

Second, you seem to think that such reporting is harmless fun. It is neither harlmess nor fun.

Finally, it is not that people who don;t read the Daily Mail are in some way evolutionary arvanced, it just appears that way because people who do read it have regressed.

all news is entertainment to some extent, always have been. a newspaper, a news channel - whatever. nothing new about this. think any tabloid, FOX news, even RTE/Prime Time FFS (with their horror movie sound tracks and hidden cameras, recently cost them a few bob too i hear!).

'harmless fun' has nothing to do with it - reading shocking stories is entertaining. end of. if you want to debate human tastes you're close to advocating censorship. if you're after less eye-catching headlines you dont understand newspapers.

your last point is the real problem. you do believe that any reader of the Mail is below you. it's just arrogance. down off your high-horse is what i say to that.

Show Time

Top class paper.

RichieC

mikemac1 wrote: »

Blatently trolling their readers, they have another Samantha Brick article up



There you go ladies, marraige advice from the Brick



A wimmins job is to please her husband

my twitter from the last time i read one of her articles:

No doubt the @MailOnline article by samantha brick will outrage many generating plenty of traffic. Expect Ms Bricks bar to go lower. #****

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

thebigbiffo wrote: »

all news is entertainment to some extent, always have been. a newspaper, a news channel - whatever. nothing new about this. think any tabloid, FOX news, even RTE/Prime Time FFS (with their horror movie sound tracks and hidden cameras, recently cost them a few bob too i hear!).

'harmless fun' has nothing to do with it - reading shocking stories is entertaining. end of. if you want to debate human tastes you're close to advocating censorship. if you're after less eye-catching headlines you dont understand newspapers.

your last point is the real problem. you do believe that any reader of the Mail is below you. it's just arrogance. down off your high-horse is what i say to that.

No, BBC isn't. But you do see the probelm of news for entertaiment and the need to sell? It gets people into trouble. People who don;t know the difference between a paeophile and pediatrician. People who hack into other people's private messages. All so that you (general, not specific) can have a quick laugh at someoen else's expense.

From clainging it's entertainment you've gone to denying it's harmless fun. Which is it? Harmful fun, maybe? What about the ethics? Do you support the means that goes into getting you that entertainment? Do you support them when the ruin someone's life for a quick buck? And then get it wrong?

There is nothing high-brow about not reading it. There is no high horse. It's just makign a choice that anyone can else can make to be informed about the world, that's all. And if being informe in someway makes you an intellectual snob, then that's a shame, but so be it.

Priori

Not liking something and having bloody good reasons is just that - not liking something and having bloody good reasons! It doesn't equate to anything like snobbery.

What if we lived in a society that embraced the idea of young kids browsing porn on the internet? It's entertainment, right? But hold on, would saying it's corrupting make you a snob?

thebigbiffo wrote:

it's just arrogance. down off your high-horse

Using that argument has its own inherent snobbery - implying that those who like the DM are able to "look beyond the warts and all" to the deeper meaning of what it means to be a news outlet - in your view, supplying entertainment.

Even if we accept that premise, the idea that anything goes just because something is considered "entertainment" is itself very questionable.

But you don't think anything goes? Well then your take on it isn't quite the same as the Daily Mail's. This example is brilliant, thanks Reoil.

inda_kenny

ive read worse , the guardian for example , if we ever get to a stage where guardian types are the norm in ireland or europe , im moving to afghanistan