Daily Fail sinks to new low.

It's disgusting and upsetting that anyone could actually be that twisted that they wish to take this tragedy and twist it to fit their own right wing Tory agenda, the headline might as well be "Vile Product of Derby County Supporting" as he was a Derby fan, its just as fallacious an argument as using the welfare system.
I actually fear that many will believe this garbage and actually support the attacks on the poor as a result, one exceptional circumstance used to tarnish the majority.
Did they do the same with Shipman "Vile Product of the NHS" if not they've missed an opportunity to undermine more of the necessary social welfare systems in the UK.

I do hope for a nationwide boycotting of that garbage masquerading as journalism, much like the Sun in Liverpool. Judging by some people views who i personally know there will be a market and plenty of people willing to lap up this disgusting story and use it to justify their own right wing views.

And to top all of under the headline "Vile Product of Welfare UK" on their front cover is not a picture of the man in question. But a picture of the six children who died in the fire, the six children who were born into this lifestyle rather than their by choice and had it cut short by their own families actions. Not a picture of the man they are attacking. How exactly are those children a "Vile Product of Welfare UK" surely they are victims of a vile man?

The Daily Mail supported Hitler and the Nazis. It could not get any lower.

You thought it was bad when they published an article that led to the death of a transgender teacher.

Now they've decided to use the death of six children to make a point about the welfare state.

Yes, it's ridiculous that Mick Philpott managed to gain that much in Welfare and something needs to be done about the system - which on the £60k a year point is with the new benefits cap - however it is tragic that six children lost their lives maybe that justice has been served should be your headline.

When even the majority of comments on the Daily Mail site are calling your article vile, you should rethink your editorial approach to manslaughter cases.

And to top all of under the headline "Vile Product of Welfare UK" on their front cover is not a picture of the man in question. But a picture of the six children who died in the fire, the six children who were born into this lifestyle rather than their by choice and had it cut short by their own families actions. Not a picture of the man they are attacking. How exactly are those children a "Vile Product of Welfare UK" surely they are victims of a vile man?

The mail makes some pair points...

You refute them on anything other than ideological grounds?

You thought it was bad when they published an article that led to the death of a transgender teacher.

Now they've decided to use the death of six children to make a point about the welfare state.

Yes, it's ridiculous that Mick Philpott managed to gain that much in Welfare and something needs to be done about the system - which on the £60k a year point is with the new benefits cap - however it is tragic that six children lost their lives maybe that justice has been served should be your headline.

When even the majority of comments on the Daily Mail site are calling your article vile, you should rethink your editorial approach to manslaughter cases.

And to top all of under the headline "Vile Product of Welfare UK" on their front cover is not a picture of the man in question. But a picture of the six children who died in the fire, the six children who were born into this lifestyle rather than their by choice and had it cut short by their own families actions. Not a picture of the man they are attacking. How exactly are those children a "Vile Product of Welfare UK" surely they are victims of a vile man?

I have two words: free speech.

If you don't like it, don't read it.

Free Speech works both ways.



If I don't like it, I have the free speech to say I don't like it.

This is what really pisses me off about uber-Libertarian free speech supporters - it's perfectly fine to say anything until you criticise something at which point they tell you "if you don't like it don't read it." Eh, no that isn't how free speech works.

I didn't say you couldn't criticise, but don't expect the Daily Mail to write politically correct articles.

I have two words: free speech.

If you don't like it, don't read it.

I don't expect them to. I don't really see your point.

Free speech works both ways, and we don't truly have free speech anyway.

If you don't like something, you can say you don't like it.

Just like the Daily Mail are free to write rubbish that people lap up on a daily basis, but even the commenters on this particular article find the way it was carried out disrespectful.