[natchina]

to be honest i am sick of the daily mail verses guardian debate. both papers are poor examples of trolling.


what do people look for in these papers exactly? surely a balanced person can take the mick out of both of them? both are absurd in their own way.


typical daily mail headline:


IMMIGRANT TB EXPLOSION BLAMED FOR RISE IN CLOSURE OF SUN BED SALONS.


typical guardian headline:

DAVID CAMERON FILMED BUYING YOGHURTS FROM TESCO 'FINEST RANGE' : PROOF TORIES ARE EVIL!!


its about time people started dropping the political partisanship. its ruining the country. come on people. show us your balance and give us your best attempts at satire for both paper headlines.

[Darth Stewie]

everything in the daily mail and guardian is fake.

even true things, once reported by the mail or guardian become lies.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Like phonehacking, perhaps.

[AshleyKay96]

Comparing the Daily Mail and the Guardian is ridiculous. One is a tabloid the other is a respected newspaper.

[cosmobear92]

(Original post by natchina)
to be honest i am sick of the daily mail verses guardian debate. both papers are poor examples of trolling.


what do people look for in these papers exactly? surely a balanced person can take the mick out of both of them? both are absurd in their own way.


typical daily mail headline:


IMMIGRANT TB EXPLOSION BLAMED FOR RISE IN CLOSURE OF SUN BED SALONS.


typical guardian headline:

DAVID CAMERON FILMED BUYING YOGHURTS FROM TESCO 'FINEST RANGE' : PROOF TORIES ARE EVIL!!


its about time people started dropping the political partisanship. its ruining the country. come on people. show us your balance and give us your best attempts at satire for both paper headlines.

I agree with you to an extent, sometimes both have the most ridiculous stories about the most pointless things e.g. Daily Mail "Look! Some celebrity didn't brush her hair!" and the Guardian "Look! Tories use the tube, they're trying to be like us, they'll never be like us!".

I don't look for much in a paper, I just want to read the news and the goings-on in the world, but given a choice I'd pick the Grauniad () any day, it does what it says on the tin, even if at times you can tell it's trying too hard to be PC and leftist, I prefer it to the hate-mongering and generalisations of the Daily Mail.

EDIT: would whoever negged me care to explain why?

[Will Lucky]

As much as I hate newspapers, I hate these two more than the others for the headlines as you say. They are just that insane.

[Llamageddon]

The Guardians science pages are infinitely better than the Mails, but when it comes to politics both will always play to their gallery. I'm of the opinion that there is truth in both left and right ideology but that whenever somebody sticks to rigidly to one of the above they fail to see the other side and are blinded by the inaccuracies within comments made by their own.

[Maddog Jones]

The Guardian is a quality newspaper - its world-renowned for respectable journalism, uncovering the phone hacking etc. It has quality comment pieces of society, the economy, and international politics. It's the most read newspaper by academics in the UK.

The Mail is a tabloid rag that supports fascism, and has a lot of racist undertones.

Both biased, to be sure, but to put them in the same pot is unfair.

[LETSJaM]

(Original post by natchina)
typical daily mail headline:


IMMIGRANT TB EXPLOSION BLAMED FOR RISE IN CLOSURE OF SUN BED SALONS.


typical guardian headline:

DAVID CAMERON FILMED BUYING YOGHURTS FROM TESCO 'FINEST RANGE' : PROOF TORIES ARE EVIL!!

Brilliant!

<3 x

[f1mad]

Dailyfail.

[Gary Barlow]

Just because you don't understand the vocabulary used in the guardian.

[JacobW]

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

My favourites: Are the Germans giving hard-working families diabetes? and Could feral children turn homeowners gay?

[animalfarm]

I agree that the DM does not have a very high intellectual standard, however it's so predictable that all the leftists defend the Gramsci, marxist Guardian as a 'high standard of journalism'

[Gary Barlow]

I think the left leaning of the guardian is a bit more subtle than the daily mails obsession with appealing to the right.

The stereotype bashed at the guardian is unfair, as someone mentioned above its reporting on science is better than any other paper and it has the badge of tackling the phone hacking scandal. I've certainly never seen anything close to what you've quoted as being a typical guardian headline, although i admit the example for the mail is strikingly accurate.

But while we're sticking with stereotypes, id rather read about David Cameron eating Museli than yet another story about Princess Diana in the Telegraph.

[mmmpie]

They're both heavily biased, but if I were to choose between the two I'd go with the Guardian every time. Buried as it often is, the Guardian tends to have more actual information in there.

(Original post by JacobW)
http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

My favourites: Are the Germans giving hard-working families diabetes? and Could feral children turn homeowners gay?

I like COULD THE LABOUR PARTY GIVE THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY SWINE FLU? and HAS CANCER GIVEN THE ROYAL FAMILY CANCER?

[Traininghard]

only the sun and the old news of the world tell the truth

[natchina]

daily mail:

KIM KARDASHIAN SWAPS ATKINS DIET FOR WHEAT GRASS DIET IN DRAMATIC DIETARY U-TURN.


guardian:


MURDOCH'S SINISTER EMPIRE BUILT ON RIGHT WING BIGOTRY: NEW STUDY REVEALS RIGHT WINGERS 0.03% MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A SKY TV SUBSCRIPTION.

[Fires]

Er, nonsense.

Daily Mail: a neo-tabloid, mainly aimed at platforming celeb tittle-tattle and with weak, sometimes lying "news" stories. Nobody outside the UK has ever heard of it. The owner is a pretend non-dom tax exile who actually lives in the UK but is mysteriously allowed to get away with it.

Guardian: a long-established bastion of freedom in this country that has done more than most to attack the corrupt and the overly-powerful, most recently in revealing the Murdoch scandal. A widely respected newspaper internationally, it is often mentioned in the US media and attacked by Fox, a sure sign of its quality.

[lulubel]

(Original post by Fires)
Er, nonsense.

Daily Mail: a neo-tabloid, mainly aimed at platforming celeb tittle-tattle and with weak, sometimes lying "news" stories. Nobody outside the UK has ever heard of it. The owner is a pretend non-dom tax exile who actually lives in the UK but is mysteriously allowed to get away with it.

Guardian: a long-established bastion of freedom in this country that has done more than most to attack the corrupt and the overly-powerful, most recently in revealing the Murdoch scandal. A widely respected newspaper internationally, it is often mentioned in the US media and attacked by Fox, a sure sign of its quality.

oh, please, pass the sick bucket. it sounds like you want to propose.


also, mail is the biggest news site in the world. so to say its unheard of outside of the uk is just wrong.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-16743645

[Fires]

(Original post by lulubel)
oh, please, pass the sick bucket. it sounds like you want to propose.


also, mail is the biggest news site in the world. so to say its unheard of outside of the uk is just wrong.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-16743645

Read the article. The Mail Group have always played games with their figures - they are simply lumping in all the "thisis" sites and claiming them as part of the main site. However, I am willing to accept that a bunch of international idiots are also entranced by the Mail's endless pictures of Kerry Katona's navel or Jordan's latest boyfriend or lesbian-lover or whatever.