[arista]

The Daily Mail
is a Legal Newspaper


Just like The Guardian is
FACT

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

The Daily Mail (aka, Hate Mail, Daily Fail, Daily Heil, Daily Moan, Crazy Mail and so on) is a reactionary, neo-fascist tabloid rag masquerading as a "traditional values," middle-class newspaper that is, in many ways, the second-worst of the British gutter press.

—Russel Howard, Mock the Week
A real Daily Mail front page. Did you know that blacks have 18 more kids than middle-class white people?

The Mail is usually considered the furthest right of all UK newspapers/tabloids; it competes for this spot with the Daily Express. Although some of the red-top tabloids might throw about more extreme rhetoric, their laddish attitude often means they're not taken too seriously - the Mail, however, is entirely Serious Business. Their primary editorial stances are:

Anti-immigration
Anti-welfare and poor people in general
Health sensationalism (particularly with respect to cancer)
Anti–government
Anti-LGBT
Anti-Europe
Anti-human rights because human rights only protect the obviously guilty and/or paedophiles or darkies.
Anti-politics because the Mail's views are not politics, but just common sense.
Anti-internet and other modern technology ('Facebook kills our children')
Anti-taxes (mainly for those who can afford to pay them)
Anti-intellectualism ('what do they know?) including academics, experts (including doctors); indeed anyone with an "-ology."
Anti-lawyers, especially those who defend the enemies of the Daily Mail State.
Anti-liberal (not realising that the opposite of liberalism - (with a small 'l') is not Conservatism but totalitarianism/fascism)
Pro-objectification of women
Declinism about UK life, the economy, etc.
Pro-complaining about anything and everything they don't like
Claiming that political changes were because of their campaigns

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail

That is just opinion and even if it were true to attempt to silence opposing opinions is for dictatorships.

[Amy Jade]

Originally Posted by arista

Amy Lady
Future SkyNewsHD 4K Reporter
this is Not a Freaking Vote thread
its a Chat and Games thread

If it was a vote I'd support Kizzy

[Crimson Dynamo]

i cant believe this is still in serious debates

Please put this in chat and games Mods


SD is getting like chat and games at the moment

jesus wept

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

That is just opinion and even if it were true to attempt to silence opposing opinions is for dictatorships.

It's factual, actually

Here's a list of things that - according to the Daily Mail - give you cancer:

http://www.anorak.co.uk/288298/keypo...m-a-to-z.html/

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Jack_

It's factual, actually

Here's a list of things that - according to the Daily Mail - give you cancer:

http://www.anorak.co.uk/288298/keypo...m-a-to-z.html/

The bit that states 'their primary editorial stances' is opinion.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

The bit that states 'their primary editorial stances' is opinion.

I can't see where it says that but regardless - it's a list of what must be at least one hundred linked examples of scaremongering nonsense by the Mail, it is anything but opinion.

The Daily Mail's agenda is pretty clear cut - right leaning, anti-welfare, anti-immigration, obsessed with health etc etc - with all due respect you'd have to be pretty vacuous to suggest otherwise. It'd be like me trying to make out The Guardian isn't anti Tory, anti capitalism, pro EU etc

[arista]

"The Daily Mail's agenda is pretty clear cut - right leaning, anti-welfare, "

Sure Clever Jack
But it's a
all Legal Paper.

I am Right Wing Jack
and I like you.

I do not want the Guardian banned,

[arista]

I do hope much later
Admin have the time to Rule on this,

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I can't see where it says that but regardless - it's a list of what must be at least one hundred linked examples of scaremongering nonsense by the Mail, it is anything but opinion.

The Daily Mail's agenda is pretty clear cut - right leaning, anti-welfare, anti-immigration, obsessed with health etc etc - with all due respect you'd have to be pretty vacuous to suggest otherwise. It'd be like me trying to make out The Guardian isn't anti Tory, anti capitalism, pro EU etc

What if it is right-leaning, there are left-leaning papers as well. You can't ban one and not the other. If posters choose to quote the Mail that is their prerogative just as it is for others to quote from other sources.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

What if it is right-leaning, their are left-leaning papers as well. You can't ban one and not the other. If posters choose to quote the Mail that is their prerogative just as it is for others to quote from other sources.

dont bother, its a joke thread and should be moved immediately

[arista]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

dont bother, its a joke thread and should be moved immediately

Bang On Right LT

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

What if it is right-leaning, there are left-leaning papers as well. You can't ban one and not the other. If posters choose to quote the Mail that is their prerogative just as it is for others to quote from other sources.

If you'd read my earlier posts in this thread you'd see that I remarked that I would actually be in favour of all tabloid articles being banned (which would include the left leaning Mirror) as opposed to just the Mail.

Tabloids engage in reactionary, inane, dumbed down gutter journalism and they should have no place in a serious debate.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Jack_

If you'd read my earlier posts in this thread you'd see that I remarked that I would actually be in favour of all tabloid articles being banned (which would include the left leaning Mirror) as opposed to just the Mail.

Tabloids engage in reactionary, inane, dumbed down gutter journalism and they should have no place in a serious debate.

yet you are happy to see a facebook /twitter teenage pathetic hitler comparison to the president of the USA?


wow, just wow



this place

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

yet you are happy to see a facebook /twitter teenage pathetic hitler comparison to the president of the USA?


wow, just wow



this place

Where did I say I was happy to see that? I haven't seen it, actually

Don't put words into my mouth thanks fam

[Jack_]

also LT I know this is par for the course with you but it's a little futile complaining about things not being appropriate for Serious Debates when you literally made a thread about people going to Tesco in their pyjamas

yeah, wow

this place

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Jack_

If you'd read my earlier posts in this thread you'd see that I remarked that I would actually be in favour of all tabloid articles being banned (which would include the left leaning Mirror) as opposed to just the Mail.

Tabloids engage in reactionary, inane, dumbed down gutter journalism and they should have no place in a serious debate.

I don't see that on a site like tibb quoting from tabloids should be banned. Some tabloids are more serious than others and if others want to quote from any tabloid so be it. You don't hear people whining constantly about the lefty papers, although many of those are the worst.

It's just a predictable attempt to undermine others. People should provide more reliable evidence if they can instead of just thinking crying 'it's from the Mail' is all they need to do - that is too easy and proves nothing.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Jack_

also LT I know this is par for the course with you but it's a little futile complaining about things not being appropriate for Serious Debates when you literally made a thread about people going to Tesco in their pyjamas

yeah, wow

this place

It was debated on radio, tv and online

a genuine news article

C5, LBC, 5 live, ITV1



what was this joke thread on?

[Niamh.]

The thread is staying where it is, Back on topic please

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I don't see that on a site like tibb quoting from tabloids should be banned. Some tabloids are more serious than others and if others want to quote from any tabloid so be it. You don't hear people whining constantly about the lefty papers, although many of those are the worst.

It's just a predictable attempt to undermine others. People should provide more reliable evidence if they can instead of just thinking crying 'it's from the Mail' is all they need to do - that is too easy and proves nothing.

I don't really care whether they are or not because I will continue to deride both the Mail and similar tabloids for their vapid 'journalism' regardless, I merely remarked that I wouldn't be opposed to the idea of such a ban being stretched to all tabloids as opposed to just the one. Also you say 'many' when the only national left-leaning papers in the UK are The Mirror, The Guardian (The Observer on Sunday's) and to a certain extent The Independent, the very idea that there are 'many' is quite frankly laughable.

It's the other way round, actually. People who are attempting to engage in a serious debate should source their information from reputable, quality sources (in this context broadsheet newspapers), and not rely on the inflammatory, juvenile nonsense printed in such pathetic rags. Content from a tabloid newspaper - unless used as material for media analysis - would have no place in an academic setting, so why should it in the context of a Serious Debates subforum?

Again, I don't really care either way because I'm happy to bask in the knowledge that it's all ****e - but if we're discussing banning one, we may as well propose banning them all.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I don't really care whether they are or not because I will continue to deride both the Mail and similar tabloids for their vapid 'journalism' regardless, I merely remarked that I wouldn't be opposed to the idea of such a ban being stretched to all tabloids as opposed to just the one. Also you say 'many' when the only national left-leaning papers in the UK are The Mirror, The Guardian (The Observer on Sunday's) and to a certain extent The Independent, the very idea that there are 'many' is quite frankly laughable.

It's the other way round, actually. People who are attempting to engage in a serious debate should source their information from reputable, quality sources (in this context broadsheet newspapers), and not rely on the inflammatory, juvenile nonsense printed in such pathetic rags. Content from a tabloid newspaper - unless used as material for media analysis - would have no place in an academic setting, so why should it in the context of a Serious Debates subforum?

Again, I don't really care either way because I'm happy to bask in the knowledge that it's all ****e - but if we're discussing banning one, we may as well propose banning them all.

You make some good points but tibb is not an academic setting. Serious debates or not it simply is not that serious.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You make some good points but tibb is not an academic setting. Serious debates or not it simply is not that serious.

And there can never be serious debate in here when so many of the most active posters get their politics from the DM.

[Withano]

I think the argument derailed a bit

People are calling the daily mail right wing and presuming thats why others want it banned from serious debates

Thats not the case

If there is a reason for banning it; it would be this: It is a non-serious paper which doesnt report news, it is a mockery of right wing media and all media.
It should be banned because the journalists are incompetent, not right wing.

However, I dont think it should be banned, people are aware of how others feel about the DM. they are surely aware they will not be taken seriously by using it as a main source..

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

And there can never be serious debate in here when so many of the most active posters get their politics from the DM.

I think we have seen on here that even when posters do produce evidence from good sources people will still not take it on board if it doesn't fit in with their way of thinking. They will find some way off dismissing it.

Besides it would take me back to having to reference every flipping source used in a piece of work. Done and dusted.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I think we have seen on here that even when posters do produce evidence from good sources people will still not take it on board if it doesn't fit in with their way of thinking. They will find some way off dismissing it.

Besides it would take me back to having to reference every flipping source used in a piece of work. Done and dusted.

Name a 'good source'...