You like horse-racing, Warbler - probably rather a lot. Would you disassociate yourself from it now that I can tell you that one of its former great patrons, Lord Bentinck, resisted by more foul than fair means, using Press and Parliamentary pressure, the overhaul of Victorian child prostitution? Everything is history at some point.
Over sixty years since the end of the last world war, Rothermere is dead and things move on a bit - as Colin has obliquely pointed out, people have no conscience about buying consumer goods made by countries with records for the most appalling war crimes (not just WWII, either - think of the 'Rape of Nanking' and then feel free to buy all of your Japanese goods without the slightest qualm, and yes, they do come highly recommended from time to time by forum members).
I can't see how Colin's remarks are at all disingenuous - far from it, you've sought to draw a parallel between the historical ownership of the Daily Mail and its past promotion of pro-Nazi ethics with its editorial stance today (hardly in the rabid BNP camp, I would venture), so it's quite reasonable, I think, to draw, say, a parellel with Dow Chemicals and the production of both Agent Orange and napalm and its current continuing financial success, or with Krupp (still a star at arms shows, thank you) and the production of Zyklon-B, and a number of current Japanese car makers who historically manufactured the Zeros which kamikazed the Americans at Pearl Harbour, and which also made the Japanese fleet which sunk so many unarmed merchantmen at sea.
There's an endless list of unfortunate histories, if you want to look for them. Plucking the Mail out as an example - well, why not attack the Daily Worker for its relentlessly pro-Russian stance both during and AFTER the war, when it well knew the horrors that Stalin was perpretrating upon the 'glorious comrades' of the USSR? You have to go for them all, if you're going at all - not just select one item for castigation.
