Read the Daily Mail? Then you are an idiot!

[smilodon]

We regularly rip the proverbial #### out of the Daily Mail, and with good justification. It's a really dreadful newspaper. However I don't really thinking much about the people who read it on a regular basis. I certainly try not to think less of them for it. It's a free world and who am I to judge. But after reading this thoroughly irresponsible and basically evil article, I really do wonder about Mail readers. What actually is wrong with them? Do they not get it? Not only are they encouraging these people by giving them their money, they have to accept responsibility for the continued harm and damage the newspaper does. I doubt the editorial team at the Mail believe any of the horseshit they peddle, they're just happy as long as their shareholders get their dividends each year. But do otherwise normal sane people really believe any of it? Are they spectacularly naive or just very stupid? And if they're not stupid then they must be aware of what a cruel, nasty and thoroughly repugnant thing the Daily Mail is. Each day it produces a newspaper, and it's a real stretch to call it that, it leaves the world a slightly worse place than it found it. So if you do buy the paper or frequent the web site please think about it, and just stop!

This subject is about people who are being killed buy a really dreadful disease, real people, real children, real sufferings, real misery. Now is not the time to be writing this sort of stuff even if you are the Daily Mail. Shame on you and shame on the people who choose to continue to read your lies. You must share a proportion of the blame too.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/spectator-surgery/2014/11/the-daily-mail-is-wrong-homeopathy-cant-cure-ebola/

[Snokio]

The sun isn't any better either, Can't remember the last time I purchased any of them tbh.

[Galatoni]

The only paper I ' trust ' us the independent and the 'i' paper. They're both pretty good - but yes, they're pushing it really.

I think a problem with a lot of it is the the people that financially support these things. Same is beginning to show with the way the BBC reports on things too so I don't think that it had ever been truly independent. I've spoken with people from the BBC that profess to being told to 'ignore' certain lines of inquiry only because of who they involve. To be honest I don't know what to make of that because I can imagine any business doing similar things.

I heard some pretty one sided arguments about the Israel-Palestine situation from just about all public media. Enough to make me so listening to them. I try to seek out my own  news now.

[Gone_Away]

but I thought the MiB read the Sun and Daily Mail? :getmecoat:

[TeaLeaf]

The only paper I ' trust ' us the independent and the 'i' paper. They're both pretty good - but yes, they're pushing it really.

Even the Independent is fairly untrustworthy and can be guilty of writing some pretty one-sided stuff.

I've said it for years, but if you want a relatively unbiased source of information (other than seeking it out ont he internet), you could do an awful lot worse than read the Financial Times.  Precisely because they tend to look at things from a financial perspective, they tend to get the base facts right and seem to be a lot less politically biased in their writings.

[Jamoe]

Been burnt almost first hand by the DailyFail. Their reporting on the Primary School that's "too english" was truly awful. If anyone caught that it's the school my wife teaches at and our children go to. :/

Not nice have BNP politicking outside the school.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2840796/Rural-school-denied-grade-Ofsted-inspectors-s-English-not-diverse-enough.html

NSFR (Not Safe For Reading )

If anyone does click, my daughter is the little one at the front with the pink headband. She's quite enjoyed her fame, channel 5 even did some filming in her class room.

edit: change "too white" to "too english", lots of people who don't know any better jumped on the band wagon have used the "too white" phrase.

[albert]

The Dutch like to cause controversy with their traditions and there's horrible reporting on both sides:

http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/5585/Home/800000279/Discussie-over-Zwarte-Piet/actua/index.dhtml

Sinterklaas is similar to Santa Claus in the UK, he has a helper, not an Elf but a small chap who enters the house through the chimney, hence his skin colour. (I can't !hink what made his lips so red). Strikingly similar to a character from the labels of jam in days gone by.

There have been anti-racial riots against this helper character. Last year we went to the town square and saw Sinterklaas and Zwarte Piet arrive on horseback

(well Sinterklaas was). The number of adults dressed up as Zwarte Piet was incredible, hundreds of them, all done up very carefully. Like some were old men.

The kids absolutely loved the spectacle. The adults argue about this, who's right and who's wrong? News papers are loving it.

Translate to English to see what this is about.

[ArithonUK]

I stopped taking all written media seriously and treated TV media as little more than an "entertainment programme" rather than real news, a long time ago.

I worked for the channel tunnel during the construction phase and the media coverage from every angle was distorted, untruthful and biased. They came to the table with a story, then searched for "facts" to back it up.

I did the weekend backups at Dover and was there when an incident occurred in the tunnel.

Main phone line rings and the G4S (Group 4 security back then) answers
"Hello TML how can I help you"
"Hi, I'm from the Mirror. Can you tell me what's happened in the tunnel? is anyone dead?"
"No, I cannot comment on anything. Please call TML Public Relations on 01303 etc...."
*click*
Another call few minutes later, same voice (this was on speaker - the guard hated the headset)
"Hello, my son works in the tunnel and I heard something might have happened to him. What can you tell me?"
"Sorry, you need to call this number 01303 etc."
*Click*
A few minutes go by.. then ring ring...
"Hello, what do you like to drink? Whiskey maybe?"
"Sorry, call the number I gave you!"
*click*

Story next day "Tunnel slays another worker!"

[suicidal_monkey]

I've said it for years, but if you want a relatively unbiased source of information (other than seeking it out ont he internet), you could do an awful lot worse than read the Financial Times.  Precisely because they tend to look at things from a financial perspective, they tend to get the base facts right and seem to be a lot less politically biased in their writings.

I reckon the same goes for the economist, ...sometimes I sense a bias towards money but it's usually blatant and part of the reasoning so easier to filter.