British public wrong about nearly everything...

[carinaman]

Breadvan72, I am not sure what the fibs are in this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2563377/No...

I'm not sure where that sits with the news yesterday that Bliar advised Brooks after the fall out over the Milly Dowler mobile phone message 'hacking', or three DPG officers falling foul of the recent Extreme Pornography legislation, or the historical sex crime trials against 'celebrities'?

[anonymous-user]

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and the fact that you can sometimes find an accurate report about something in the Mail does not detract from the criticism of the paper as a retailer of falsehoods and an encourager of fear and prejudice. Look at its history of anti-Semitism, its support for the Nazis, its key role re the Zinoviev letter, and the current record of scare stories about heath issues, migration, the economy, crime, you name it, all this accompanied by moral prurience side by side with photos of shelebs falling out of their tops.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 20th February 09:57

[Cheese Mechanic]

I like the DM. Anything that denegrates pompous arrogant lefties and causes them to pull a face like they have sat on a turd while they wring their self righteous hands has to be a great commodity.

I especially like Littlejohn, heck he dishes it out , does make me laugh. Good for him.

[don4l]

Breadvan72 said:

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and the fact that you can sometimes find an accurate report about something in the Mail does not detract from the criticism of the paper as a retailer of falsehoods and an encourager of fear and prejudice. Look at its history of anti-Semitism, its upport for the Nazis, its key role re the Zinoviev letter, and the current record of scare stories about heath issues, migration, the economy, crime, you name it, all this accompanied by moral prurience side by side with photos of shelebs falling out of their tops.

I love the way you can ignore the falsehoods in last week's Independent while berating The Mail for 70 year old articles and simultaneously demonstrating Godwin's Law.

Brilliant stuff!

[DeanR32]

Cheese Mechanic said:

I like the DM. Anything that denegrates pompous arrogant lefties and causes them to pull a face like they have sat on a turd while they wring their self righteous hands has to be a great commodity.

I especially like Littlejohn, heck he dishes it out , does make me laugh. Good for him.

Does it rile up the lefties more than it does it's main readers (not sure what you call the right)?

I'll be honest. I'll have to pop and buy one to see what the DM is all about (it won't sway me from my own opinions but I need to see why it seems such a controversial paper)

[anonymous-user]

don4l said:

Breadvan72 said:

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and the fact that you can sometimes find an accurate report about something in the Mail does not detract from the criticism of the paper as a retailer of falsehoods and an encourager of fear and prejudice. Look at its history of anti-Semitism, its upport for the Nazis, its key role re the Zinoviev letter, and the current record of scare stories about heath issues, migration, the economy, crime, you name it, all this accompanied by moral prurience side by side with photos of shelebs falling out of their tops.

I love the way you can ignore the falsehoods in last week's Independent while berating The Mail for 70 year old articles and simultaneously demonstrating Godwin's Law.

Brilliant stuff!

I don't excuse falsehoods in any newspaper. The Mail builds its entire business on the propagation of falsehoods and the encouragement of fear. Its history is relevant because it has been consistent since its foundation in adopting a mendacious approach to reporting and in disseminating fear and suspicion. The psychology of its readers is interesting. Do they want to be frightened and so read the Mail, or do they learn to be frightened by reading it? Perhaps a bit of both.

[carinaman]

I am frightened by the wardrobe malfunctions of celebrities?

[anonymous-user]

Well you may not be frit, but I live a sheltered life and find all those boobies and tats pretty terrifying! I try to steel myself by spending most of the day looking at them.

[carinaman]

And there I was checking out the crumbling steel leading edge of the bonnet on your RR.

You shamelessly lifted that bonnet to expose all. Hypocrite!

[Digga]

Rovinghawk said:

The DM once did a superb hatchet job on an ex-GF of mine. It was wonderfully accurate & in contrast to what was in the other papers at the time.

Was it an acrimonious split and did you ghost write the article?

[carinaman]

Rovinghawk said:

The DM once did a superb hatchet job on an ex-GF of mine. It was wonderfully accurate & in contrast to what was in the other papers at the time.

That confession reminds me of this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2563465/Wo...

[anonymous-user]

carinaman said:

And there I was checking out the crumbling steel leading edge of the bonnet on your RR.

You shamelessly lifted that bonnet to expose all. Hypocrite!

Fair cop. BTW, I bid farewell to the old red Rangey of rustiness yesterday. I have replaced it with something even more ridiculous. Anyway, that's twice we have mentioned cars now, so we'd better hush up in case we get into trouble.

[Countdown]

Breadvan72 said:

Do they want to be frightened and so read the Mail, or do they learn to be frightened by reading it? Perhaps a bit of both.

Stories in The DM make them feel that their inner prejudices are justifiable/reasonable rather than swivel eyed frothy looniness.

It's a vicious circle.

[Rovinghawk]

Digga said:

Rovinghawk said:

The DM once did a superb hatchet job on an ex-GF of mine. It was wonderfully accurate & in contrast to what was in the other papers at the time.

Was it an acrimonious split and did you ghost write the article?

Very acrimonious- I offered to help write articles & was told to get in line.

[anonymous-user]

Gizgoogle Daily Mail. Word up, duebrahz!

http://www.gizoogle.net/tranzizzle.php?search=dail...

[Derek Smith]

Countdown said:

Stories in The DM make them feel that their inner prejudices are justifiable/reasonable rather than swivel eyed frothy looniness.

It's a vicious circle.

Most people read the papers and books, and listen to the broadcasts that reinforce their prejudices. That goes for most people. It takes effort to listen to both sides, and even then, prejudice colours interpretations.

I've got a friend who devours the DM and believes everything that is written therein, except those parts he knows something about. They had a series of articles on his profession which were so outside the facts that they were funny. They had similar articles about his previous job as well, something he took a great deal of pride in, which again was pure fantasy. Yet he still thinks Dacre sees his function as reporting the facts.

[carinaman]

But they did do that:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080159/St...

I have no idea who she is, and I still don't like the shields as they look anemic on white, but I like that:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-25639...

'Look at the plenums on that'?

The chap in the tie fiddling with a clasp reminded me of Breadvan72's gratuitous open bonnet shot of his departed Range Rover.

From the second link above:

Speaking to MailOnline, Luisa said: ‘It was £200k new and I bought it when it was 18 months old... I'll let you work out the depreciation!!’

See, a sensible comment on the Daily Mail website. She's taken advantage of the price drop with the new vent laden model just being announced?

Those shields are too much yellow what with the caliper and wheelcaps, and the side repeater needed to be in the gills of that vent or the bottom of the door mirror.

Edited by carinaman on Thursday 20th February 20:38

[don4l]

Breadvan72 said:

don4l said:

Breadvan72 said:

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and the fact that you can sometimes find an accurate report about something in the Mail does not detract from the criticism of the paper as a retailer of falsehoods and an encourager of fear and prejudice. Look at its history of anti-Semitism, its upport for the Nazis, its key role re the Zinoviev letter, and the current record of scare stories about heath issues, migration, the economy, crime, you name it, all this accompanied by moral prurience side by side with photos of shelebs falling out of their tops.

I love the way you can ignore the falsehoods in last week's Independent while berating The Mail for 70 year old articles and simultaneously demonstrating Godwin's Law.

Brilliant stuff!

I don't excuse falsehoods in any newspaper.

However, you seem to be utterly blind to the falsehoods in the Independent.

Every time that I mention the lies that you referred to in your OP, you immediately switch to Daily Mail bashing.

Breadvan72 said:

The Mail builds its entire business on the propagation of falsehoods and the encouragement of fear.

Of course it does...

as does the Independent.

Here are some examples that are sure to scare the life out of the (limited number of) bedwetting Independent readers.

Kerry tells Indonesia: climate change is a 'weapon of mass destruction'

This next example is odious in a way that only lefties can be. There were 30,000 excess deaths last year due to an unusually cold winter. How does the Independent report this tragety? Here you go:-

Deaths caused by heat will rise to average of 7,000 a year in 2050

Gosh!

We know that 30,000 people died in 2012/2013 because of the cold. The target audience of the Independent is more worried about an utterly unscientific prediction that 7,000 people might die from heat in 2050???

Breadvan72 said:

Its history is relevant because it has been consistent since its foundation in adopting a mendacious approach to reporting and in disseminating fear and suspicion. The psychology of its readers is interesting. Do they want to be frightened and so read the Mail, or do they learn to be frightened by reading it? Perhaps a bit of both.

The Independent does exactly the same thing, as I have demonstrated above.

The difference is that I am aware that the Mail is pandering to its audience.

[anonymous-user]

I do not know why you have a bee in your hat about the Indy. I don't read it or put it forward as some paragon of journalism. I have no loyalty to it, and don't care if anyone slags it off. You seem very upset that anyone might suggest that the Mail is a famously mendacious and irresponsible publication, but such a suggestion is hardly novel.

[turbobloke]

Breadvan72 said:

I do not know why you have a bee in your hat about the Indy. I don't read it or put it forward as some paragon of journalism. I have no loyalty to it, and don't care if anyone slags it off. You seem very upset that anyone might suggest that the Mail is a famously mendacious and irresponsible publication, but such a suggestion is hardly novel.

If you want factual embellishment (making stuff up, i.e. lying) and plagiarism on a regular basis, the Indy has been the place to go for over a decade 2002-2012.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/09/une...

http://order-order.com/2011/07/01/when-hari-met-re...

Despite the facts being clear enough, there was no dismissal and the guilty party merely 'left' after this "the newspaper reported in September 2011 that Hari admitted the plagiarism allegations and would attend a journalism training course before returning" all we needed after the retraining was a promotion and it would have been straight out of the public sector bible.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/jan/20/johan...

Most of the time when people complain about the Mail it's not a Mail issue as there's a primary source which can include HMG and ONS, where content fails to delight it's because the columnists (e.g. Samantha) are given column inches for material that people judge to be worthless. That's not harmful in the manner of lies and plagiarism.