It shouldnt be banned because its right wing, id ignore any posts that suggest this is the reason

The strong argument for me was banning it because its terrible. Full of terrible journalists with backward mindsets, and awful nazi roots which I did not know about...
The issue is with the DM in particular, not all right wing media. Because the DM simply makes a mockery of right wing media and all media.

I dont know what youre on about democratic processes, we're discussing newspapers.. But speaking about democratic processes since you brought it up, maybe the forum should vote on it? Seems like there are arguments on both sides, and a vote might settle it. You keep going on about how much you like democracy, you must be elated with this idea of mine.

Why would that be? Or are you having a little troll? I don't mind, everyone else has had a go :laugh:

Why would other papers be banned... Just for some tit for tat nonsensical reason, who has raised issues with other papers to such an extent as the mail has..genuinely?

No I wouldn't because to ban it would not only be appallingly arrogant it would demonstrate bias and favouritism for one side over another. This is also a predominantly left-wing forum. It does not require a vote because some people don't like the paper. Childish nonsence.

Where is all the evidence to prove all these journalists have nazi roots? Have you looked at the background of the journalists of left-wing papers and does having 'nazi roots' make someone a nazi - sounds more like a witchhunt to me.

Stuff and nonsence coming from people with an agenda in my opinion.

Feel free to do your own research, but I provided a snapshot.
Personally I don't feel the alliances have shifted that significantly.


'Lord Rothermere disposed of his shares in the Daily Mirror in 1931. He now concentrated on the Daily Mail and the Evening News. In the 1930s Rothermere moved further to the right. When Hitler became Chancellor on 30th January 1933, Rothermere produced a series of articles acclaiming the new regime. The most famous of these was on the 10th July when he told readers that he "confidently expected" great things of the Nazi regime. He also criticised other newspapers for "its obsession with Nazi violence and racialism", and assured his readers that any such deeds would be "submerged by the immense benefits that the new regime is already bestowing on Germany."

Rothermere now began a campaign in favour of the Nazi Party. The Daily Mail criticized "the old women of both sexes" who filled British newspapers with rabid reports of Nazi "excesses." Instead, the newspaper claimed, Hitler had saved Germany from "Israelites of international attachments" and the "minor misdeeds of individual Nazis will be submerged by the immense benefits that the new regime is already bestowing upon Germany."

George Ward Price, the Daily Mail's foreign correspondent developed a very close relationship with Adolf Hitler. According to the German historian, Hans-Adolf Jacobsen: "The famous special correspondent of the London Daily Mail, Ward Price, was welcomed to interviews in the Reich Chancellery in a more privileged way than all other foreign journalists, particularly when foreign countries had once more been brusqued by a decision of German foreign policy. His paper supported Hitler more strongly and more constantly than any other newspaper outside Germany." Franklin Reid Gannon, the author of The British Press and Germany (1971), has claimed that Hitler regarded him as "the only foreign journalist who reported him without prejudice". In his autobiography, Extra-Special Correspondent (1957), Ward Price defended himself against the charge he was a fascist by claiming: "I reported Hitler's statements accurately, leaving British newspaper readers to form their own opinions of their worth."

http://spartacus-educational.com/Jmail.htm

In my opinion, people should be free to post whatever source they like.. And others should be free to ridicule that source, and the first person should be aware which sources this is most likely to happen with. But as with every thread I come in to, my mind can be changed by good arguments. And lets both be honest, the opposing side have made a hell of a better argument than our side has.

Read through the thread, the nazi roots was discussed a couple pages back. I cant imagine your mind would be changed on the topic with or without me fetching the posts for you, so I'll skip doing you this favour. This was something I assumed you would have already seen yourself considering your active involvement in the thread..

I briefly read something posted by Kizzy but that was from decades ago. What does that have to do with today's journalists for the paper - are we labelling every DM journalist a nazi sympathiser because of the actions of some journalists years ago - are we tarring all DM journalists with the same brush because of their political views. Having so-called right-wing views does not a nazi make.

Maybe a little one but seriously it does pain me to see the Canary posted anywhere, its so clickbait

But the argument of how influential the nazi beginnings is to the DM today is very much open.

I hate The Sun more than the Daily Mail because at least with the Daily Mail what you see is what you get.

With The Sun they'll be much more sneaky about who's side they're on but will still plant seeds for whoever they want to win an Election or bringing a law forward.

if anything, people shouldn't post stuff from the daily mail because it's childish, repetitive bile

"khloe kardashian flaunts her ample assets in a racy bikini"

"chloe khan braces the cold whilst showing off her assets in a racy instagram selfie"

"these brain teasing puzzles are taking the internet by STORM: can YOU solve them?"

the mail is just as sneaky and even worse for planting seeds imo

they'll post articles about celebrities who they know the majority of their readers will dislike expressing left wing views, all in the aim of getting their readers venting in the comments section

The only one I see behaving like a snowflake here is you.:laugh:

Hmmm... How is any rational news source supposed to become established these days, especially a 'nu media' one?
If you had some rationale for this, then I might be able to see your issue... But I don't see one.

Yes, there is a debate there, are their views that far removed from where they were?
The evidence would suggest not to me :/

I think we should also ban Sky News in 1080i HD and also 720p.

Yeah, let's ban the DM. Why not? It's the way SD is going.

OK
SkyNewsHD 4K soon anyway TS

Plus a robot sitting next to the Fit lady presenter
a First in the WORLD TS


not Max Headroom

More Speaking and able to UPDATE
Fit Lady Human next to him
faster that a Ear bit


TS
Feel The Force

UTTER BOLLOCKS

the DM gives me the Best Shocking CBB photos
and Riot Photos


DM is the best for FREE Photos

FECKiNG Guardian say NO Photo Copy image
so DEATH TO YOU


Die away you NASTY paper Guardian not allowing photo jpgs to be used
I used to get Fantastic images from Guardian online
those days have gone, sadly
they are to Die

Why would anyone post showbiz news in SD?:shrug:

Maybe you should look at the top of the page on the site and use the NEWS section and steer clear of showbusiness

yes lets ban the DM and have more facebook stuff like "hey hun did you see that Donald Trump is effectively Hitler"


lol at all those who HATE the DM clapping and agreeing with that :joker:

you

could

not

make

it

up


:rolleyes:

How Nice

Imagines Arista dancing round his kitchen in Cuban heels. :dog:

No Heels
Working 24/7 Shifts

Keep Fit as well


Feel The Force

I hope you're not on here in working hours then.

Just saying