"Sorry Daily Mail content"
Discussion
longblackcoat said:
Essel said:
1. Not sure about that, it was called the Grauniad for a reason.
2. Have you read the comments to their articles?? I wouldn't use "smart" to describe a lot of them.
BTW, I read the mail for entertainment, the guardian to warm up, and come here for reasoned debate. ??
2. Have you read the comments to their articles?? I wouldn't use "smart" to describe a lot of them.
BTW, I read the mail for entertainment, the guardian to warm up, and come here for reasoned debate. ??
henrycrun said:
The DM make up stories to sell more papers. Others may/may not do the same.
Guardian averages 1 correction a day.https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/series/cor...
This one was 'very mail' and recent, 30th june
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jun/30/corre...
hyphen said:
mikal83 said:
I've been banned from the daily fails online edition for being nasty to the ultra right wing trump supporters......you know the "Throw her out" brigade.
Nasty how though? Why not engage with them as a grown up, rather than getting all antifa.mikal83 said:
hyphen said:
mikal83 said:
I've been banned from the daily fails online edition for being nasty to the ultra right wing trump supporters......you know the "Throw her out" brigade.
Nasty how though? Why not engage with them as a grown up, rather than getting all antifa.You can search for more info on the Antifa movement all by yourself
hyphen said:
mikal83 said:
hyphen said:
mikal83 said:
I've been banned from the daily fails online edition for being nasty to the ultra right wing trump supporters......you know the "Throw her out" brigade.
Nasty how though? Why not engage with them as a grown up, rather than getting all antifa.You can search for more info on the Antifa movement all by yourself
Integroo said:
The Guardian isn't biased. It has some ridiculous opinion pieces but it's general reporting is excellent and rigorous.
Their journalism has come out with plenty of important stuff over the years that possibly wouldn't have otherwise emerged. The floppy-haired guilt tripping whining on the opinion side of things has made me dislike the Guardian even more than the DM and that's truly saying something. If I were running it I'd shape it into a pure conveyor of inconvenient truth. Every columnist encouraging me to commit suicide for not being apologetic enough for existing would be told to get a job down a mine somewhere.
hyphen said:
mikal83 said:
I've been banned from the daily fails online edition for being nasty to the ultra right wing trump supporters......you know the "Throw her out" brigade.
Nasty how though? Why not engage with them as a grown up, rather than getting all antifa.mikal83 said:
Please explain. What is "all antifa"?
Anti-fa is a catch all term used by the far right to demonise anyone they don't like. Usually an indication that the user doesn't inhabit reality.Essel said:
captain_cynic said:
1. It's more erudite. If you want to improve your mastery of the English language, you can do a lot worse than read the Guardian.
2. Because of 1, they cant be as blatant as the DM, let alone the Daily Express with their lies as the readership are smart enough to spot obvious lies.
1. Not sure about that, it was called the Grauniad for a reason.2. Because of 1, they cant be as blatant as the DM, let alone the Daily Express with their lies as the readership are smart enough to spot obvious lies.
2. Have you read the comments to their articles?? I wouldn't use "smart" to describe a lot of them.
BTW, I read the mail for entertainment, the guardian to warm up, and come here for reasoned debate. ??
2. I avoid the comments section on any news site. No matter who it is, it's an unregulated, unmoderated mess... hence attracts the worst commentators. When it comes to quality, journalism matters, the comments section doesn't.
<tongue in cheek mode>
Well I for one won't have anything bad said against the Daily Mail.
When the lovely Tracy Cox produces the following informative article for both males and females then I will keep reading.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7253833...
<\tongue in cheek mode>
Well I for one won't have anything bad said against the Daily Mail.
When the lovely Tracy Cox produces the following informative article for both males and females then I will keep reading.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7253833...
<\tongue in cheek mode>
captain_cynic said:
Anti-fa is a catch all term used by the far right to demonise anyone they don't like. Usually an indication that the user doesn't inhabit reality.
This was discussed on the Rogan podcast recently, a Vietnamese-American journalist was battered by the Antifa recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI2EHMy1lgsDidn't sound like a catch term to me.
Even the BBC acknowledge that they are extreme: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/X56rQkDg...
Anyway we are off topic. How bad the Mail is, or isn't, is the question isn't it? Not some nutter on here who they banned and has a gripe
grumbledoak said:
captain_cynic said:
Anti-fa is a catch all term used by the far right to demonise anyone they don't like. Usually an indication that the user doesn't inhabit reality.
And "far right" is what, exactly?hyphen said:
This was discussed on the Rogan podcast recently, a Vietnamese-American journalist was battered by the Antifa recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI2EHMy1lgs
Didn't sound like a catch term to me.
Even the BBC acknowledge that they are extreme: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/X56rQkDg...
Anyway we are off topic. How bad the Mail is, or isn't, is the question isn't it? Not some nutter on here who they banned and has a gripe
Of course it doesn't sound like a catch all term to you... You're using it to demonise anyone you disagree with.Didn't sound like a catch term to me.
Even the BBC acknowledge that they are extreme: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/X56rQkDg...
Anyway we are off topic. How bad the Mail is, or isn't, is the question isn't it? Not some nutter on here who they banned and has a gripe
Anti-fa is short for "anti fascists" and it a catch all term formerly used to describe anyone opposed to fascism. It is not a single organisation with a central authority as you have made out. Did you even read the BBC Opinion article you posted.
Congratulations, you've demonstrated that I was quite correct. You don't actually know what the term means and you're just using it as a very bad thought terminating cliche. Also, you don't live in reality.
If you want to talk about willingness to use violence, reference James Fields Jr, Charlottesville, et al. The far right isn't just willing to use violence, it is one of their first resorts as using violence to enforce fascism is a key tenant of fascism..
Edited by captain_cynic on Thursday 18th July 12:54
captain_cynic said:
It is not a single organisation with a central authority as you have made out
So who posts out the all-black dress code & face masks then You seem very passionate about this subject, you know I was just asking that fella if he should have toned down his language so he hadn't got banned.
I'm not getting into what ever happens to be this this chip on your shoulder here. So take care!
Edited by hyphen on Thursday 18th July 13:59
captain_cynic said:
grumbledoak said:
captain_cynic said:
Anti-fa is a catch all term used by the far right to demonise anyone they don't like. Usually an indication that the user doesn't inhabit reality.
And "far right" is what, exactly?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff