|
Post by brisfitboy2 on Jul 22, 2022 21:39:27 GMT
Because of occasional historical pieces I meant🤦♂️
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,316
|
Post by markf on Jul 23, 2022 5:25:30 GMT
I buy it out of habit going back 40 odd years. The sport was decent then with the likes of Wooldridge. Messing about with a broad sheet on the tube wasn't going to happen while the rest were comics (still are).
It was also the first paper to stop the print ending up on your fingers.
The historical pieces can be good. Sand brook is good - fronted some good tv stuff too. Platell is bitchy and loves herself. Can't stand her and as for Hitchens what a bore and also an absolute know all. I hate the bloke.
Still why buy a paper that you agree with all the time? Hardly challenging if you do.
|
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 23, 2022 8:05:35 GMT
Many of my grandparents' generation steadfastly refused to buy the Daily Mail on account of its many headlines and editorials that actively supported fascism, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" being the most infamous. My late grandfather was one of those who fought the British Union of Fascists (BUF) during the Battle of Cable Street. He took an exceedingly dim view of a national newspaper who actively fanned the flames of far-right extremism and continued to do so to his dying day.
To this day, the Daily Mail has more complaints upheld about it by the press regulator than any other daily news publication and headlines in recent years continue to echo those of the Nazi propaganda of the 1930's. As a news source, it is notoriously unreliable, as exemplified by Wikipedia editors voting to ban the Daily Mail as a source of information on their website.
It is certainly a "challenging" publication, but that's scant justification for buying it, let alone reading it. Hitchin's covid-denying anti-vax hysteria would be amusing though, if it weren't for the sobering death toll.
|
|
|
Post by brisfitboy2 on Jul 23, 2022 10:41:20 GMT
Many of my grandparents' generation steadfastly refused to buy the Daily Mail on account of its many headlines and editorials that actively supported fascism, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" being the most infamous. My late grandfather was one of those who fought the British Union of Fascists (BUF) during the Battle of Cable Street. He took an exceedingly dim view of a national newspaper who actively fanned the flames of far-right extremism and continued to do so to his dying day. To this day, the Daily Mail has more complaints upheld about it by the press regulator than any other daily news publication and headlines in recent years continue to echo those of the Nazi propaganda of the 1930's. As a news source, it is notoriously unreliable, as exemplified by Wikipedia editors voting to ban the Daily Mail as a source of information on their website. It is certainly a "challenging" publication, but that's scant justification for buying it, let alone reading it. Hitchin's covid-denying anti-vax hysteria would be amusing though, if it weren't for the sobering death toll. Now isn’t that funny. My parents always bought the Daily Express but I can’t stand it and just think it’s all about headlines with no substance, maybe not as right-wing as the Mail in the 30’s but there we are, at least we have a choice today unlike Nazi Germany even if we feel our choices are limited by some? rubbish publications. Thank God we don’t live in quasi fascist Russia today.
|
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 23, 2022 10:56:27 GMT
Many of my grandparents' generation steadfastly refused to buy the Daily Mail on account of its many headlines and editorials that actively supported fascism, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" being the most infamous. My late grandfather was one of those who fought the British Union of Fascists (BUF) during the Battle of Cable Street. He took an exceedingly dim view of a national newspaper who actively fanned the flames of far-right extremism and continued to do so to his dying day. To this day, the Daily Mail has more complaints upheld about it by the press regulator than any other daily news publication and headlines in recent years continue to echo those of the Nazi propaganda of the 1930's. As a news source, it is notoriously unreliable, as exemplified by Wikipedia editors voting to ban the Daily Mail as a source of information on their website. It is certainly a "challenging" publication, but that's scant justification for buying it, let alone reading it. Hitchin's covid-denying anti-vax hysteria would be amusing though, if it weren't for the sobering death toll. Now isn’t that funny. My parents always bought the Daily Express but I can’t stand it and just think it’s all about headlines with no substance, maybe not as right-wing as the Mail in the 30’s but there we are, at least we have a choice today unlike Nazi Germany even if we feel our choices are limited by some? rubbish publications. Thank God we don’t live in quasi fascist Russia today. How interesting you should bring up quasi fascist Russia, given that it was the Daily Mail owning Rothermere family who chose to sell the 181 year old London Evening Standard to a Russian oligarch whose father just happened to be in the KGB. Given the Rothermere family's decades long contempt for core British values like democracy and the rule of law, some commentators considered this to be par for the course.
|
|
|
Post by brisfitboy2 on Jul 23, 2022 16:52:55 GMT
Ah yes, but I did mean one’s choice in Russia today, we all know the upper class look after no.1 irrespective of any outcome that may arise at a later date, “nothing to do with me chum” is the answer.
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,316
|
Post by markf on Jul 23, 2022 17:58:58 GMT
Many of my grandparents' generation steadfastly refused to buy the Daily Mail on account of its many headlines and editorials that actively supported fascism, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" being the most infamous. My late grandfather was one of those who fought the British Union of Fascists (BUF) during the Battle of Cable Street. He took an exceedingly dim view of a national newspaper who actively fanned the flames of far-right extremism and continued to do so to his dying day. To this day, the Daily Mail has more complaints upheld about it by the press regulator than any other daily news publication and headlines in recent years continue to echo those of the Nazi propaganda of the 1930's. As a news source, it is notoriously unreliable, as exemplified by Wikipedia editors voting to ban the Daily Mail as a source of information on their website. It is certainly a "challenging" publication, but that's scant justification for buying it, let alone reading it. Hitchin's covid-denying anti-vax hysteria would be amusing though, if it weren't for the sobering death toll. Excuse me. Why should I have to justify anything I do, as long as it's legal, to anyone let alone someone I don't believe I have ever met? For someone who obviously doesn't read the DM there is a lot of knowledge of Hitchens' ridiculous stance on Covid lockdowns. I could say something similar about Mirror readers considering one of their current political commentators, if indeed such a paper actually aspires to employ such people, was pictured paying homage at Karl Marx's tomb? However, each to their own.
|
|
|
Post by VCLXI on Jul 23, 2022 19:26:54 GMT
I will say one thing, the Mail does have a great quick crossword.
Other than that there is nothing regarding lower league football. Not even a cryptic clue.
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,316
|
Post by markf on Jul 23, 2022 20:00:10 GMT
When I first used to buy it it had excellent NL results coverage on a par with the Telegraph.
That has slowly vanished in the age of the internet.
The Sunday Mail was the first to give full NL tables down to Isthmian Prem level.
Non league paper does all that and much more now.
|
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 23, 2022 20:35:56 GMT
Many of my grandparents' generation steadfastly refused to buy the Daily Mail on account of its many headlines and editorials that actively supported fascism, "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" being the most infamous. My late grandfather was one of those who fought the British Union of Fascists (BUF) during the Battle of Cable Street. He took an exceedingly dim view of a national newspaper who actively fanned the flames of far-right extremism and continued to do so to his dying day. To this day, the Daily Mail has more complaints upheld about it by the press regulator than any other daily news publication and headlines in recent years continue to echo those of the Nazi propaganda of the 1930's. As a news source, it is notoriously unreliable, as exemplified by Wikipedia editors voting to ban the Daily Mail as a source of information on their website. It is certainly a "challenging" publication, but that's scant justification for buying it, let alone reading it. Hitchin's covid-denying anti-vax hysteria would be amusing though, if it weren't for the sobering death toll. Excuse me. Why should I have to justify anything I do, as long as it's legal, to anyone let alone someone I don't believe I have ever met? For someone who obviously doesn't read the DM there is a lot of knowledge of Hitchens' ridiculous stance on Covid lockdowns. I could say something similar about Mirror readers considering one of their current political commentators, if indeed such a paper actually aspires to employ such people, was pictured paying homage at Karl Marx's tomb? However, each to their own. For regular readers of Private Eye, yes, Hitchen's ridiculous antics are very well known. He also has a habit of writing to the Letters page, much to the editor's amusement. As you say, each to their own.
|
|
|
Post by davethegrave on Jul 25, 2022 7:55:07 GMT
Platell is bitchy and loves herself. Can't stand her and as for Hitchens what a bore and also an absolute know all. I hate the bloke. Still why buy a paper that you agree with all the time? Hardly challenging if you do. Amanda Platell has every right to love herself. I love her too! Hitchens is also a bit strange in that he does always give good examples of his arguments although I don't agree with them. If I can't do the quick crossword I think it's going to be a bad day. And yes their football coverage does seem to have become a bit concentrated on the Premier League although as Mark says their results and tables page is usually very detailed.
|
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 25, 2022 9:58:00 GMT
Platell is bitchy and loves herself. Can't stand her and as for Hitchens what a bore and also an absolute know all. I hate the bloke. Still why buy a paper that you agree with all the time? Hardly challenging if you do. Amanda Platell has every right to love herself. I love her too! Hitchens is also a bit strange in that he does always give good examples of his arguments although I don't agree with them. If I can't do the quick crossword I think it's going to be a bad day. And yes their football coverage does seem to have become a bit concentrated on the Premier League although as Mark says their results and tables page is usually very detailed. I strongly suspect Dr Gopal doesn't share your love of Amanda Platell, or anyone else who has received death threats as a direct consequence of her demonstrably false news articles, for that matter... www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-academic-daily-mail-apology-19278320As long as unscrupulous media outlets continue to create a rhetoric which actively manufactures hatred, most notably against people from ethnic minorities, innocent men and women will continue to face unwarranted abuse and threats in their daily lives. The Daily Mail was and remains the scourge of functioning democracy and civilised society.
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on Jul 25, 2022 15:22:12 GMT
Still why buy a paper that you agree with all the time? Hardly challenging if you do. Because I'd rather not give money to an organisation that actively stirs hatred and contributes to oppression of minority groups. But as you've said, it's up to you what you spend your money on.
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,316
|
Post by markf on Jul 25, 2022 17:04:45 GMT
Well, that's your take on it.
I don't see JK Rowling or Sharon Davies as being bad people. All they have done is state a biological fact and if a newspaper agrees with them why shouldn't they?
It's called free speech, something being slowly eroded under the guise of so called hate crimes.
It's not.
And btw, the DM's campaign over Steven Lawrence led directly to the report that found the met police as being institutionally racist and finally got guys convicted.
It's by no means a paragon of virtue but it ain't as bad as you seem to want to paint it.
|
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 25, 2022 17:39:10 GMT
Well, that's your take on it. I don't see JK Rowling or Sharon Davies as being bad people. All they have done is state a biological fact and if a newspaper agrees with them why shouldn't they? It's called free speech, something being slowly eroded under the guise of so called hate crimes.It's not. And btw, the DM's campaign over Steven Lawrence led directly to the report that found the met police as being institutionally racist and finally got guys convicted. It's by no means a paragon of virtue but it ain't as bad as you seem to want to paint it. It is this so-called "free speech" which is directly responsible for hate crimes, as the link which I provided earlier so clearly illustrates. As those who know me are already aware, following a series of extremely inflammatory and false articles in the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday during lockdown, a man turned up at my place of work with a knife, handcuffs and Nazi regalia with the intention of kidnapping and murdering some of my colleagues. The office in question has since closed down and my former co-workers continue to fear for their lives. I have since relocated to another part of the country with a new job and my new home address is now registered with the police. It's been a very dark couple of years (as if covid wasn't enough to contend with) but I have managed to get through it, with the help of family and loved ones, with the notable exception of my mother, an avid Daily Mail reader, who to this day is the only person in my life who has refused to condemn what was, to all intents and purposes, a terrorist attack. Until this day, I have refrained from posting anything about my personal life on this forum, but when I read a blatantly false assertion that the Daily Mail somehow have the right to fan the flames of far right extremism under the guise of "free speech", then it's time for me to point out how utterly misguided and downright dangerous that assertion is.
|
|