The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by datpiff
The only people I know who read the Daily Mail are baby boomers who live in small conservative semi-rural villages


Posted from TSR Mobile


Same here!
Original post by intelligent con
Cos the Grauniad is definitely known for its high quality spelling and grammar :rolleyes:


Sorry? did I say it was?
Reply 62
Original post by молодой гений
It's not 'snobbery' to point out that the paper is ridiculous. Every single page is just, like, "MUSLIMS MUSLIMS IMMIGRANTS WOMEN LESBIANS GAY PEOPLE THEY ALL SUCK waahhh ROMANIANS!!!!111111"

Besides, the UK's been talking about immigration so much that I feel sick even looking at Nigel Farage's ****ing face. It's disgusting. Pitting the working classes against each other / against foreigners in order to distract them from the "real evil" of capitalism etc isn't exactly a brand new strategy tbh.


So? "Ridiculous" is subjective, people's opinions are different to yours, and people want to know about religious extremism & immigration so there is evidently a market for the paper. And not every page is about the topics mentioned.. I'd say judging from the current top 30 stories on their app 2/30 of the stories are about the topics you've mentioned.

Thing is with immigration is that you get good immigration + bad immigration, some of it is beneficial and some of it isn't. It has different effects in different areas and I tend to find those who aren't affected by it think the rest of the people who think some of it is bad are racists, bigots etc etc. Of course the BBC and other news agencies talk about reports etc so that they get more viewers, and that has meant more people have been talking about immigration (some to the point of insanity).

I've seen polls also claim that UKIP is very close to Labour in his policies, he wants trains re-nationalised and the NHS privatisation to be stopped. Hardly anti-working class to me. If you don't like capitalism I'd recommend the Morning Star btw.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Also Richard Littlejohn.
Original post by flibber
You forgot to add that their 'journalists' often make very obvious spelling mistakes. I must say the Daily Mail is like drugs; it's bad for me but I get addicted to it- especially the claims on immigrants and Muslims (which I find amusing).


From the Grauniad? Really?!

The Daily Mail and the Guardian are just two sides of the same hate filled coin. One makes you self flagellate (if you are the majority) and blame the majority (if you are the minority) and the other makes you hate the minority, Ok the majority may be more able to handle the burden of hatred, but they are both hate filled rags, filled with inflammatory bile and clickbait.
Original post by Huskaris
From the Grauniad? Really?!

The Daily Mail and the Guardian are just two sides of the same hate filled coin. One makes you self flagellate (if you are the majority) and blame the majority (if you are the minority) and the other makes you hate the minority, Ok the majority may be more able to handle the burden of hatred, but they are both hate filled rags, filled with inflammatory bile and clickbait.


The Guardian has hate in it but definitely not as much as the Daily Heil. I'm no fan of the Guardian, but Let's be real. They deserve an award for that. Opening up the Daily Mail site is like being involved in the haters ball on Chappelle's Show.

The Guardian is bad, but not as bad as The Daily Mail.


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by datpiff
The Guardian has hate in it but definitely not as much as the Daily Heil. Let's be real. They deserve an award for that. Opening up the Daily Mail site is like being involved in the haters ball on Chappelle's Show.


Posted from TSR Mobile


I disagree, I would say the Guardian has exactly as much, and there are plenty more loons in the comment is free section that there are Richard Littlejohns at the Daily Mail
Original post by Huskaris
I disagree, I would say the Guardian has exactly as much, and there are plenty more loons in the comment is free section that there are Richard Littlejohns at the Daily Mail


Comments sections are full of loons in general. I never read them. I've visited the Youtube comments sections and 4Chan so nothing much on those sites can shock me anyway lol.


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Huskaris
From the Grauniad? Really?!

The Daily Mail and the Guardian are just two sides of the same hate filled coin. One makes you self flagellate (if you are the majority) and blame the majority (if you are the minority) and the other makes you hate the minority, Ok the majority may be more able to handle the burden of hatred, but they are both hate filled rags, filled with inflammatory bile and clickbait.


I never quoted from the Guardian, and the Guardian is not my newspaper of choice.

I dislike the Guardian too; as much as I detested Gove, I felt that the Guardian had the urge to publish an 'article' every other day condemning his reforms- it was a bit immature of what is supposed to be a reputable newspaper.

My choice of newspaper is the Times; I just feel its political bias (although there is a very good case which says that news can never be reported completely objectively) is less than the others (although my piano teacher, who likes the Guardian and the Telegraph (as the two give him two contrasting viewpoints), calls the Times 'tabloidy'). The Telegraph isn't bad either.
Original post by flibber
I never quoted from the Guardian, and the Guardian is not my newspaper of choice.

I dislike the Guardian too; as much as I detested Gove, I felt that the Guardian had the urge to publish an 'article' every other day condemning his reforms- it was a bit immature of what is supposed to be a reputable newspaper.

My choice of newspaper is the Times; I just feel its political bias (although there is a very good case which says that news can never be reported completely objectively) is less than the others (although my piano teacher, who likes the Guardian and the Telegraph (as the two give him two contrasting viewpoints), calls the Times 'tabloidy'). The Telegraph isn't bad either.


Good response +1
Original post by Huskaris
Good response +1


Thanks!
Reply 71
i wont lie i go on their very often but sometimes they post the most POINTLESS things and multiple of that too e.g. kim and kanyes wedding had 10 articles saying the exact same thing...? however i must admit i do like their layout but sometimes their facts are just wrong

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by somemightsay888
the commenters, who themselves probably only have a GCSE in Applied Racism


:rofl::rofl: I think that's a bit harsh. Some of them have A Levels in science denial as well.

Original post by flibber
You forgot to add that their 'journalists' often make very obvious spelling mistakes. I must say the Daily Mail is like drugs; it's bad for me but I get addicted to it- especially the claims on immigrants and Muslims (which I find amusing).


To be honest, condemning the DM for its spelling and grammar is a bit like assassinating Hitler because of his poor bin collection policies.
Reply 73
to be fair to the dailymail, they have improved a lot recently and have been more balanced. obviously it is still right wing but its not totally one sided like the guardian
Original post by RFowler
:rofl::rofl:
To be honest, condemning the DM for its spelling and grammar is a bit like assassinating Hitler because of his poor bin collection policies.

Although the Daily Mail should not be discredited as a source of information solely due to its spelling mistakes, first impressions matter very much in today's society.

There are some who may believe that:

1) The Daily Mail's spelling and grammar mistakes may be a bad influence on young readers (to be honest, I am personally for removing the more pedantic, although forgotten features of English grammar to be erased).
2) ...And while you may disagree, some may also believe that spelling mistakes from journalists reflect immaturity (again, I don't think that spelling mistakes by itself should defeat the points they're making, even if their latest headline is titled "FIFTEE (sic) PURCENT (sic) OV (sic) BRITISH PEEPOL (sic) CARNT (sic) PARS (sic) BAISIK (sic) INGLISH ( sic) SPELIN (sic) TEST") and stupidity. A bit similar to how your English teacher may deduct marks off your English test for spelling and grammatical errors.
3) Journalists should know how to spell, just like doctors should know how to use medical equipment properly- both should protect the reputation of their professions (although a case could be made that the analogy doesn't work)

My counterarguments are more to do with the thoughts of some people in our society, than my own, although there are other factors that would discredit the Daily Mail (as listed by Chlorophile).

EDIT Plus the question was about why people hate the Daily Mail- their views could be flawed as well :tongue:
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by sdotd
to be fair to the dailymail, they have improved a lot recently and have been more balanced. obviously it is still right wing but its not totally one sided like the guardian


What?! The Daily Mail is a real news site?! I thought it was a parody site like Onion :frown:

Oh well... I got some laughs. You know you're gonna have a fun read when the an article begins with "foreign", "Muslim" or "immigrants".


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 76
Original post by datpiff
What?! The Daily Mail is a real news site?! I thought it was a parody site like Onion :frown:

Oh well... I got some laughs. You know you're gonna have a fun read when the an article begins with "foreign", "Muslim" or "immigrants".


Posted from TSR Mobile


ummm ok
They hate Mesut Ozil, so I hate the Daily Mail.
Original post by angelfox
They hate Mesut Ozil, so I hate the Daily Mail.

Probably because he's foreign, immigrant and a muslim.
Now we can't be having that can we!
Original post by KingMessi
The analogy is an unfair one because global capitalism, Zionism and patriarchy are, you know, actually damaging things, whereas immigration generally just isn't - at least not to anything like the same scale. I don't dispute that the Guardian occasionally gets things very wrong and looks for sensation/outrage where there probably isn't, but at least it's full of people that actually recognize that Zionism, Capitalism, and patriarchy actually need interrogating in a way that immigration and students just don't.

The Mail believes that the world's greatest evils are multiculturalism, students, smoking marijuana, and immigration. The Guardian believes that the world's greatest evils are the things you mention above. For that reason alone I'm more likely to tolerate The Guardian making a mistake or indulging in some unnecessary and misguided hyperbole than I'm likely to tolerate The Mail doing the same.


So what you're saying is that the Mail is wrong because it is... wrong?

All you're doing there is stating which position you agree with. That's fine, but it suggests that the problem with the Daily Mail is that it's position generally is false, not that it does things in the wrong way, or something else similar.

I don't think most critics would say that, and I don't think most people in this thread would say that the main problem is that the Daily Mail is this particular brand of right-wing.

Although, to address the content of your claim, considering that there is nowhere that really has pure Capitalism, I'm not sure what you mean by global Capitalism being harmful. And I most certainly reject your claim that the 'Patriarchy' has any meaningful existence, and even more emphatically that it is 'damaging': this is just radical feminist tripe. Similarly unsure about Zionism.

Latest