Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    :facepalm2: read what I said. It doesn't matter whether she wanted it or not, what she thinks is completely irrelevant. I'll summarise:
    Article 1: This chap has made light of underage sex, isn't he horrible.
    Article 2: We're making light of underage sex, isn't it great?

    If you still can't see why that is hypocritical, then I see no further point in talking to you until you get a grasp of the English language.
    You've hurt my feelings.

    I'm saying that the context surrounding these two articles is different
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not keen on the Daily Mail because they run campaigns to sway some of the UK population into believing biased and often unsupportable ideas. It is fun to look at to see what they are saying on the run up to election, but worrying that some of their readers actually believe what the stories are saying and will not give creedance to opposing views.
    I wonder how the readers would feel if it were rebranded as a Labour paper?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CRIKEY12)
    I'm not keen on the Daily Mail because they run campaigns to sway some of the UK population into believing biased and often unsupportable ideas. It is fun to look at to see what they are saying on the run up to election, but worrying that some of their readers actually believe what the stories are saying and will not give creedance to opposing views.
    I wonder how the readers would feel if it were rebranded as a Labour paper?
    But its not a labour paper dont say that :eek:
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Cephalus)
    You've hurt my feelings.

    I'm saying that the context surrounding these two articles is different
    Well, I don't care.

    Explain the difference then. Explain the outrage over satire of paedophilia for making light of it, and how it differs so much from sexualising an underage child, that it's not hypocritical?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Well, I don't care.

    Explain the difference then. Explain the outrage over satire of paedophilia for making light of it, and how it differs so much from sexualising an underage child, that it's not hypocritical?
    Because the article on the right talks about a comedy about paedophilia. Who does the comedy hurt? Potentially everybody who has been molested.

    The DM makes a comment about Charlotte Church's breasts. Who gets hurt? Nobody. And Charlotte Church gets publicity, and probably feels better about herself
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cephalus)
    But its not a labour paper dont say that :eek:
    irony?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SpicyStrawberry)
    Well, they're a bunch of hypocrites who are dead against banning porn on the internet but are happy to post pictures of teenage girls in their bikinis/underwear every day, and their articles are riddled with spelling and factual errors. It's absolute rubbish.

    I direct you to Russell Howard's opinion, it sums it up quite nicely:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPEzM2oV-PY
    How is that hypocritical? If they're against banning porn and they post semi-pornographic pictures each day...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Hateful, useless and often incorrect info, far too right wing, etc...

    This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my HTC Desire S
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    The Daily Mail has good insightful journalism that brings you the stories other sources don't,

    Nicole Scherzinger reveals her nipple in see through black dress at the NTAs:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...ress-NTAs.html

    Heidi Klum wears ultra sheer LBD and bears thigh:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...enos-desk.html

    Very naughty girls! Dakota Fanning and Elizabeth Olsen stand on a couch to pose in co-ordinating monochrome outfits:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...e-outfits.html

    You wouldn't get the leftist propaganda papers like the Guardian or Independent bringing these issues to light.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)

    You wouldn't get the leftist propaganda papers like the Guardian or Independent bringing these issues to light.
    Well you would, back when the Sun supported Labour when they were in govt.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cephalus)
    The thing that I like about the DM is the quality of the journalism they produce. Everyday, I see an exciting array of stories that covers a broad range of issues. They don't fear to tread where other, more "popular" papers wouldn't. Indeed, they also promote alot of good causes. Yet on this forum, the paper is referred to as the "Daily Fail". Why do people feel so badly about this paper?

    Neg all you want. The circulation figures speak for themselves
    You, sir, should be a comedian.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Because they are the biggest spinners in the publicated media. They post tripe.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cephalus)
    The thing that I like about the DM is the quality of the journalism they produce. Everyday, I see an exciting array of stories that covers a broad range of issues. They don't fear to tread where other, more "popular" papers wouldn't. Indeed, they also promote alot of good causes. Yet on this forum, the paper is referred to as the "Daily Fail". Why do people feel so badly about this paper?

    Neg all you want. The circulation figures speak for themselves
    The circulation figures speak for themselves because our nation is full of idiots who read crap like the daily mail produces. They're also the ones who lick celebrities bums all day and praise shows like big brother.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CRIKEY12)
    I'm not keen on the Daily Mail because they run campaigns to sway some of the UK population into believing biased and often unsupportable ideas. It is fun to look at to see what they are saying on the run up to election, but worrying that some of their readers actually believe what the stories are saying and will not give creedance to opposing views.
    I wonder how the readers would feel if it were rebranded as a Labour paper?
    *credence

    for the record
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 29, 2013
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.