Daily Mail

It's not a nice paper. Mean minded. But frankly this is a nothing story although I don't blame him for his anger

Celebrities lie too. Look at all those on here who rushed to defend Ryan giggs and his lies and what the result was?
 
I didn't defend Giggs. Quite the opposite!

I am more thinking of stories it ran like on that Boyzone member who passed away. That writer, I forget her name, should (literally) have been shot, it was horrendous.
 
Barely funny. She was also involved in some other controversy. Her writing is on a par with what a 10 year old could produce.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1220756/A-strange-lonely-troubling-death--.html Edit: The headline they used here isn't the original one which was something like 'why there is nothing natural about this death'

Reaction
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2009/oct/16/stephen-gately-boyzone
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/oct/16/stephen-gately-jan-moir
 
Last edited:
Point is though you know what you are getting with biased papers like the mail. And most readers know tehre will be some rubbish

But a "trusted" source like the bbc is a different matter. I have just watched the news coverage of the public sector strikes. I'm no fan of state "workers" but the coverage was so laughably slanted it should have been sponsored by the unions. It was a farce
 
I will admit I read The Mail
Only for the sport really, Martin Samuel and Neil Ashton are excellent
I'm not to keen on some of their columnists in the front of the paper mind.
 
Good plan

They will have no trouble getting in the country now with a criminal record

They thought ahead. Fair play to them
 
fonz said:
I will admit I read The Mail
Only for the sport really, Martin Samuel and Neil Ashton are excellent
I'm not to keen on some of their columnists in the front of the paper mind.
Click to expand...

The wife used to read it at the weekends- a few years ago when Ireland beat England at Rugby Martin Samuel started his article with a reference to paedophile priests.
 
Strangely enough I can see the appeal of the mail to anyone with plenty of time on their hands-there alway seems to be plenty to read in it.
 
Last I checked they were the only paper not in decline sales-wise for their print copy.

Whatever you think about the content, the papers sell.
 
harry said:
Does anyone still buy newspapers?
I have read them online for years now.
Click to expand...

I do. Times which is downloaded onto ipad at same time. Same with Economist, which is a superb read

What i do find is that I spend more time properly reading the printed edition. ipad version looks good but still tend towards skimming

Times is very good in certain areas (sport, overseas news, columnists) but slipping far too much towards crap coverage in other areas.

Get the Observer on Sundays too. Good paper
 
Back
Top