The Daily Mail

[Steve Crook]

Originally Posted by rskershaw I've always taken The Times (except the Sunday) as I've found it to be fairly level headed, though the thought of its Guv' is not pleasant.

Although you won't read much against China and their human rights policy in there because of its Guv' trying to expand his meeja empire in that direction

Steve

[Jackdaw]

The Daily Mail is quite simply a newspaper dedicated to opposing the Labour Party.
The Zinoviev letter was published to that end, and throughout my time the paper has continually opposed, ridiculed and misrepresented left of centre opinion.
The fact that the egregious Littlejohn is now it's star columnist, tells all about the readership it seeks.
The problem is - what to read?
I used to take The Times because I liked the crossword, but I was driven away by the appalling young fogeys such as Michael Gove and Daniel Finkelstein, the latter a particularly unprepossessing character.
The former tabloids are comics, and of the serious papers, The Independent lost me through its sloppy and inaccurate reporting, The Guardian I find worthy but tedious, and The Telegraph I find boring, but with excellent cricket coverage.
I no longer take a newspaper, and despite watching TV news and reading online news sites, I find myself worse informed than previously, so I now have to face returning to the print news fold..................................but which?

[BristolUK]

Newspapers have their own agendas...of course they do.

The Sun is part of the Murdoch group which owns Sky...so naturally it slags off the BBC because it's a rival broadcasting company.

At some point, most newspapers will have a conflict of interest in news items due to the interests of their owners/editors. I remember a major story about an arms deal (although not the details) covered a certain way in the Observer amid allegations that coverage was biased due to the (then) owners of the Observer being linked to a rival arms dealing company.

Remember the Sun back in the 70s? Banging the drum for Thatcher and persuading the working classes that their interests would best be served by Thatcher. Lo and behold the editor was knighted. Yes, the editor of the Sun was actually knighted.

The Guardian is owned and run by a trust. The trustees obviously have their opinions, ideals and stances and, therefore, their own agenda. But they are not influenced by commercial interests so you are far less likely to see worthy news items ignored or distorted due to conflicts of interests.

[billy bentley]

Some time back I read an intersting book titled "The Fascists In Britain" written by Colin Cross and published in 1961. According to the aiuthor the Daily Mail once ran a headline "Hurrah For Blackshirts". Can't say I was suprised.

[Steve Crook]

Originally Posted by Jackdaw The Daily Mail is quite simply a newspaper dedicated to opposing the Labour Party. The Zinoviev letter was published to that end, and throughout my time the paper has continually opposed, ridiculed and misrepresented left of centre opinion. The fact that the egregious Littlejohn is now it's star columnist, tells all about the readership it seeks. The problem is - what to read? I used to take The Times because I liked the crossword, but I was driven away by the appalling young fogeys such as Michael Gove and Daniel Finkelstein, the latter a particularly unprepossessing character. The former tabloids are comics, and of the serious papers, The Independent lost me through its sloppy and inaccurate reporting, The Guardian I find worthy but tedious, and The Telegraph I find boring, but with excellent cricket coverage. I no longer take a newspaper, and despite watching TV news and reading online news sites, I find myself worse informed than previously, so I now have to face returning to the print news fold..................................but which?

None of them
Stick to the broadcast media, including radio, and set up some RSS feeds from news services around the world that you trust

Steve

[Moor Larkin]

I love reading the Mail because it challenges all my natural Catholic/Communist instincts and reminds me that the real enemy are all those stinking, often liberal/socialist, but sometimes conservative/authoritarian bureauocrats who want to regulate my life and my country with their petty-fogging regulations and rampant 'law-making'.

I like that The Mail often seems to say what nobody else seems to want to (whether I agree with it or not). Sometimes. Other times, when they're rambling on about Diana or some such tedious celebrity, I get really ticked off that I've spent my hard-earned cash on this garbage.

There is also the an element that a 'papers print-style has to be aesthetically pleasing to me. My favourite 'paper was always The Times but now it's gone tabloid I find it less attractive. I have never liked The Telegraph because it's layout never seemed to have the bordered clarity of The Times. I could never stomach The Guardian because they couldn't spell properly and it had a nasty, smudgy print-style. I used to like The Express but would never buy it now because of it's typescript.

I have never bothered with any of the scurrilous naked-lady 'papers because with my evidently higher-than average reading speed, they represented very poor value for money.

[Lord Brett]

I must admit to having a deep-seated dislike of the Daily Mail (and I've had a pop at it manny times on this forum) due to growing up in the 1980s in a Mail-buying household. At the time its pet subjects were an anti-gay bias and an ongoing campaign about 'the myth of heterosexual AIDS'. What I saw, day after day, was opinion dressed up as news to a horrendous extent.

I see the Express more often these days, as I work in a public library in an area with a high immigrant population, and am often embarrassed to put a newspaper out on public display with endless 'Immigrants are Killing Britain' headlines.

My favourite Express cover story of recent months was so outrageous that I had to read the whole story. It read that the British government were funding Palestinian terrorists out of your taxes. When I read to the end of the article, the rationale behind this arrant nonsense was that Britain gives funding to humanitarian projects in the Palestinian Authority, which freed up funds for their government to use for terrorism!

No actual reporting had gone on to create this story, as it had been fed to them (as was admitted within the story) by a right-wing pressure group called the Taxpayers Allience.

[Lord Brett]

Off subject, I know, but I wish someone would start up an adventure strip in one of the papers again. I really miss being able to follow something like Garth or Modesty Blaise.

[CaptainWaggett]

Originally Posted by Lord Brett Off subject, I know, but I wish someone would start up an adventure strip in one of the papers again. I really miss being able to follow something like Garth or Modesty Blaise.

Admit it - you just want someone to revive Jane!

[batman]

Originally Posted by Steve Crook None of them Stick to the broadcast media, including radio, and set up some RSS feeds from news services around the world that you trust Steve

I am with you on this one Steve. I tend to listen to The World Service and other BBC radio channels (plus News24 on TV) and online news services. Any recommendations for others that may be worthwhile for me to track down?

[batman]

Originally Posted by CaptainWaggett Admit it - you just want someone to revive Jane!

So will you and M'Lord be rushing out to buy the Odeon 'Best of British' dvd of the film version!

[Lord Brett]

Originally Posted by CaptainWaggett Admit it - you just want someone to revive Jane!

Or Axa, from the Daily Star, back when that was a proper newspaper.

[Marky B]

I don't have a problem with any of the newspapers (except for the Daily Star and the Daily Sport - I'm surpised that one hasn't had a mention yet). I read them and I think I am intelligent enough to determine my own thoughts.
Like Bats,I can't understand why the DM always get singled out - all of the tabloids are sensationalism newspapers,prone to giving out mistruths (how many of them boast of a "world exclusive" on the same story on the same day).
I don't read the Telegraph,Times,Guardian etc,because there is just too much in them,whereas in the others there is enough for me to glance through when eating my breakfast,or having a coffee and a bar of chocolate.
In fact,I think we are all intelligent enough on this site to make up our own thoughts and not rely on what we read in ANY newspaper.
Ta Ta
Marky B

[Steve Crook]

Originally Posted by batman I am with you on this one Steve. I tend to listen to The World Service and other BBC radio channels (plus News24 on TV) and online news services. Any recommendations for others that may be worthwhile for me to track down?

BBC World Service is one of the best. It stays fairly independent of government and the latest BBC trends. They don't advertise other BBC programmes as much as most of the others. It also covers national and international news quite well

Steve

[batman]

Originally Posted by Steve Crook BBC World Service is one of the best. It stays fairly independent of government and the latest BBC trends. They don't advertise other BBC programmes as much as most of the others. It also covers national and international news quite well Steve

Cheers .... I listen to that one the most so I'll stick with it.