Is the Daily Mail really that bad?

Snazzy_Chazzy · 01-02-2012 06:30PM

elgriff wrote: »

I am in disbelief that anyone reads it, and worry about people trusting it.

Here is a site showing a list of things the daily mail says can give you cancer, as well as thing that can prevent cancer. Needless to say there is overlap!

http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/

The daily mail gives you cancer!!!!!!!:eek:

"Runs to Beaumont for colonoscopy and lubes up" :eek:

The King of Moo · 01-02-2012 06:35PM

And don't forget of course, the hypocrisy of them claiming to be some sort of moral guardian, yet filling their pages (and the entire right-hand side of their home page on the website) with women in bikinis. Just like the Sun with Page 3.

It's at its worst when they combine outrage with prurient titillation in the same article.
For example: their website carried a headline outraged at 14-year old actress Chloe Moretz (Kick-ass, Hugo) wearing a leather outfit, alongside a thumbnail of her in said outfit, sandwiched between minor celebrities in bikinis (and I don't mean "sandwiched" in the way you might be thinking!).
Naturally, upon clicking on the headline to read more, a number of photos of her in the outfit and other more adult-appropriate outfits took up far more space than the outraged text.

They did the same thing around the same time with an article about the parents of a 15-year old model who were outraged at a magazine ad featuring her in a revealing pose.
Right beside the offending picture so you know what to get titillated outraged about.

Pretty sick.

Spread · 01-02-2012 06:48PM

I go through the Mail and Indo (as well as other papers) daily and find some of the makey uppy stories faintly amusing. They are both rags and have followed The Enquirer down that road. However, if I wanted to get news and more boring in dept news I'd hit The Irish Times, London Times or Daily Torygraph. Papers no longer are the main news providers for most people (except The League of Gentlemen types).

Hampster Goes Missing or Freddie Starr ate my Hampster

Which story would you read? Go on! Be honest!

Biggins · 01-02-2012 06:49PM

Priori wrote: »

...Have there been any clear instances of it publishing outright dishonest, nasty, agenda-pushing bullsh1t?

Totally!

Priori wrote: »

...I'm honestly just curious, and would be grateful for any links.

http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/

Spread · 01-02-2012 06:51PM

KeithAFC wrote: »

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

I was wondering where you got the idea from Keith

Incidentally, where does the AFC come from?

biko · 01-02-2012 06:54PM

g'em wrote: »

I read the Daily Mail on-line every lunchtime (now the most read on-line newspaper apparently). I treat it much like I do the men in my life - pretty to look at and perfectly perfunctory for a quick fix but I couldn't give a flying fart what it has to say.

There is a heart of stone somewhere beneath those rock hard muscles.

01-02-2012 06:58PM

I never got the Irish indo and Sunday Indo hate. I've been reading both since I was a child as it was and is bought at home nearly every day. I think its a nice compromise between the boredom of the Times and the utter crap of the tabloids. Its miles ahead of the tabloids don't see how people compare it to them. If I was to put it in a group it would be with the Irish times etc and not with the tabloids.

The King of Moo · 01-02-2012 07:04PM

Valentina Worried Rainfall wrote: »

I never got the Irish indo and Sunday Indo hate. I've been reading both since I was a child as it was and is bought at home nearly every day. I think its a nice compromise between the boredom of the Times and the utter crap of the tabloids. Its miles ahead of the tabloids don't see how people compare it to them. If I was to put it in a group it would be with the Irish times etc and not with the tabloids.

Because it combines both?

I don't think the daily Independent is as bad as the Sunday Independent, but the Sindo is pretty shocking.

Tons of articles, especially in the magazine, about non-entity "celebrities" only known to Barry Egan, who of course has to tell us all about how much he knows them.

There was the case a few months of the young girl modelling a dress and the "article" containing an ad and directions for her mother's boutique, when the story's focus was purportedly about the tragic death of the girl's boyfriend.

Of course there's the awful article about the Polish woman which is basically completely full of lies.

If I gave the paper more attention than I do I'd have more examples.
But when I do have a look it's invariably full of fluff pieces about non-celebrities and rabble-rousing nonsense with poor standards of journalistic integrity.

Batsy · 01-02-2012 07:10PM

The Daily Mail is a very popular newspaper, well-liked not only in the UK - where it is the second most-read newspaper after The Sun - but also around the world.

One reason for its success, of course, is down to its popular views, views which are shared by the majority of people, unlike lefty newspapers whose bizarre views only resonate with sandal-wearing, tofu-eating, Friends-of-the-Earth type people in Islington.

This is shown in the fact that the Daily Mail website is now the most popular newspaper website on the planet, overtaking that of the New York Times.

In fact, MailOnline is the fifth biggest newspaper in the United States.

I also enjoyed reading The Guardian's article about this. The Guardian, the left-wing bible, has a readership which is miniscule compared to that of the Daily Mail, and is shrinking rapidly. So it was good to see The Guardian, which usually can't report on anything without making disaparaging comments about the Daily Mail, even if it's in articles about probes being sent to Mars, reporting jealously on the Mail's success.

I also enjoyed reading the inevitable childish comments from The Guardian's left-wing, PC readers in the comments section underneath the article on The Guardian's website.

I particularly enjoyed this comment, though, from "Toolow":

Love all the twitchy-lipped Guardian people getting so worked up about this. If you don't like hugely popular sites which produce excellent journalism for everybody then don't read them.....

And will the sullen, negative nobodies who wants to bring race into everything please note that I'm a man of colour. Like many of my compatriots I first started reading the Daily Mail because it presents information and comment in well written English - good usage at all times. It's read by thousands of immigrants for this reason.

By comparison, the NYT is pretentious and boring. To be fair, the Guardian isn't, but there are some right little curtain twitchers who read it.

Paparazzo · 01-02-2012 07:14PM

Batsy wrote: »

The Daily Mail is a very popular newspaper, well-liked not only in the UK - where it is the second most-read newspaper after The Sun - but also around the world.

Says a lot about the intelligence of Brits and brit expats if they're the 2 most popular british papers.
What's number 3? The daily sport?

mikom · 01-02-2012 07:15PM

Batsy wrote: »

This is shown in the fact that the Daily Mail website is now the most popular newspaper website on the planet, overtaking that of the New York Times.

They are visiting it for the pictures not the text.

Batsy · 01-02-2012 07:16PM

Paparazzo wrote: »

Says a lot about the intelligence of Brits and brit expats if they're the 2 most popular british papers.
What's number 3? The daily sport?

It says a lot about the intelligence of the people around the WHOLE PLANET, who like the paper so much they have made its website the No1 newspaper website on Earth.

Batsy · 01-02-2012 07:17PM

mikom wrote: »

They are visiting it for the pictures not the text.

"Toolow" (see above), a Daily Mail reader, would disagree with you there.

And will the sullen, negative nobodies who wants to bring race into everything please note that I'm a man of colour. Like many of my compatriots I first started reading the Daily Mail because it presents information and comment in well written English - good usage at all times. It's read by thousands of immigrants for this reason.

Toolow (his response to Guardian readers on The Guardian's website)

The King of Moo · 01-02-2012 07:18PM

Batsy wrote: »

The Daily Mail is a very popular newspaper, well-liked not only in the UK - where it is the second most-read newspaper after The Sun - but also around the world.

One reason for its success, of course, is down to its popular views, views which are shared by the majority of people, unlike lefty newspapers whose bizarre views only resonate with sandal-wearing, tofu-eating, Friends-of-the-Earth type people in Islington.

This is shown in the fact that the Daily Mail website is now the most popular newspaper website on the planet, overtaking that of the New York Times.

In fact, MailOnline is the fifth biggest newspaper in the United States.

I also enjoyed reading The Guardian's article about this. The Guardian, the left-wing bible, has a readership which is miniscule compared to that of the Daily Mail, and is shrinking rapidly. So it was good to see The Guardian, which usually can't report on anything without making disaparaging comments about the Daily Mail, even if it's in articles about probes being sent to Mars, reporting jealously on the Mail's success.

I also enjoyed reading the inevitable childish comments from The Guardian's left-wing, PC readers in the comments section underneath the article on The Guardian's website.

I particularly enjoyed this comment, though:

Love all the twitchy-lipped Guardian people getting so worked up about this. If you don't like hugely popular sites which produce excellent journalism for everybody then don't read them.....

And will the sullen, negative nobodies who wants to bring race into everything please note that I'm a man of colour. Like many of my compatriots I first started reading the Daily Mail because it presents information and comment in well written English - good usage at all times. It's read by thousands of immigrants for this reason.

By comparison, the NYT is pretentious and boring. To be fair, the Guardian isn't, but there are some right little curtain twitchers who read it.

The Daily Mail is very popular, but that's only because they deliberately spin stories or make up out-and-out lies to sensationalise stories that get people outraged.
It's simple common sense that sensationalised news will grab more people's attention and thus sell more copies.

I'm not a big fan of The Guardian and its own biases either, but at least they don't appear to make things up (as the two websites posted earlier show about The Daily Mail).

Sales figures don't necessarily equate to journalistic integrity, just skill at grabbing attention.

Paparazzo · 01-02-2012 07:19PM

Batsy wrote: »

It says a lot about the intelligence of the people around the WHOLE PLANET, who like the paper so much they have made its website the No1 newspaper website on Earth.

What countries have The Sun as their best selling paper then?

Batsy · 01-02-2012 07:20PM

Paparazzo wrote: »

What countries have The Sun as their best selling paper then?

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.

etchyed · 01-02-2012 07:22PM

Here's another nice example of the Daily Mail making stuff up to suit its own purposes and blatantly contradicting itself:

Jaw-dropping behaviour from The Daily Mail - Graham Linehan's blog

Celly Smunt · 01-02-2012 07:24PM

meh it's ok i suppose,i only look at the pictures anyway.

Batsy · 01-02-2012 07:24PM

The Daily Mail is the 11th most popular newspaper in the world (but its website is the most popular newspaper website).

The Guardian doesn't even make it in the world's Top 100.

Latchy · 01-02-2012 07:25PM

One way to ascertain the intelligence of Brits who read the Daily Mail is to view the comments section under each news item . There you'll find that among the good , the bad ,the ugly and the stupid /iggnorant comments, you'll also find a good majority shooting down those very same articles as not newsworthy and pure shyte , just as you might find a fair section of people from different walks of life and people discussing topics on any social network site such as in AH / Boards.ie .

Edit -Highlighted for Batsy .

wolf moon · 01-02-2012 07:26PM

All the media are sh1te and I personally don't spend a second going through the bullsh1t they serve.

annascott · 01-02-2012 07:26PM

How bad can it be? I would read the Daily Mail before being caught dead with any red-top tabloid...

Celly Smunt · 01-02-2012 07:28PM

annascott wrote: »

How bad can it be? I would read the Daily Mail before being caught dead with any red-top tabloid...

so because it doesn't have a red top you would buy it?

Batsy · 01-02-2012 07:28PM

Latchy wrote: »

One way to ascertain the intelligence of Brits who read the Daily Mail is to view the comments section under each news item .

Nah. That's just you using the WORLDWIDE popularity of the Daily Mail as an excuse to have an anti-British rant.

The King of Moo · 01-02-2012 07:32PM

Batsy wrote: »

The Daily Mail is the 11th most popular newspaper in the world (but its website is the most popular newspaper website).

The Guardian doesn't even make it in the world's Top 100.

Why don't you tackle some of the examples of their poor journalistic standards posted here instead of just saying how many people buy the thing?

Popularity does not always equal quality. Look at how many people watch films and TV programmes that are crap.

Here's the top ten highest-grossing films of last year.

1 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
2 Transformers: Dark of the Moon
3 Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
4 The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1
5 Kung Fu Panda 2
6 Fast Five
7 The Hangover Part II
8 Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
9 The Smurfs
10 Cars 2

Surely then, The Smurfs and Twilight are cinematic masterpieces, no?

Nodin · 01-02-2012 07:32PM

Batsy wrote: »

The Daily Mail is the 11th most popular newspaper in the world (but its website is the most popular newspaper website).

The Guardian doesn't even make it in the world's Top 100.

So you're trying to say quality = popularity?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 01-02-2012 07:33PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The daily mail is just a right wing tabloid.

Theyre not afraid to talk about issues that need to be talked about , like immigration or the islamisation of the UK, but the problem is that they sensationalize it and try to cause panic among people.

The daily mail is just basically the other side of the same coin as something like indymedia.

it angers some on the right because of its sensationalising of stories
it angers all those on the left because they dont know how the world works and think we should all pretend that everything works perfectly

ah, veiled insult to hide ignorance, I see.

People on the left hate the Daily Mail for pretty much the same reasons as people on the right.

Latchy · 01-02-2012 07:41PM

Batsy wrote: »

Nah. That's just you using the WORLDWIDE popularity of the Daily Mail as an excuse to have an anti-British rant.

Actually it has more to do with a previous poster asking of the Intelligence of the readers of the Daily Mail which if you read my post again, was explaining that it's readers comments are a good testimony of that Intelligence (good , bad or indifferent ) which you (wrongly ) choose to assume ment I was saying it's readers are of Low Intelligence (not all of them ) and of having an anti british rant .

You just took one line from my quote to make it look like something else ...like what some ****ty journo might do ...why did you do that ?

In fact as other will testify , I have posted quite a few times on boards over the last years pointing out some post's as just that ie ' Anti- British ' .

So you need to get your facts clear before making such iggnorant statements . :rolleyes:

mikom · 01-02-2012 07:47PM

Nodin wrote: »

So you're trying to say quality = popularity?

Justin Beiber never lies.

mikom wrote: »

They are visiting it for the pictures not the text.

pmcmahon wrote: »

meh it's ok i suppose,i only look at the pictures anyway.

Thank you.

Latchy · 01-02-2012 07:50PM

The pictures of nature ,space and the wild life (human and animal ) in the DM are worth logging in for it alone .

Is the Daily Mail really that bad?

Comments