You should just ignore what Wibble said if you have a problem with it.
Daily Mail
- Thread starter p_ps_sock
- Start date
You should just ignore what Wibble said if you have a problem with it.
Alistair needs to learn what constitues a reportable post.
'Bad parents' are also perhaps likely to be of a personality type where they are unable to sustain personal relationships and end up as a single parent.
Nonetheless: conservative types are not much interested in mitigating complexities like 'socioeconomic factors'. They are much more interested in black and white prejudices like 'ITS THE GAYS' or 'ITS THE DIVORCE', that make them feel morally superior.
Aye I have heard this can be a downside when you have kids.
I admire Al fighting the valiant battle...or whatever you want to call it.
Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, to the Leveson Enquiry*, 18th July 2011:
Littlejohn alone merits 83 articles on the Tabloid Watch website, the reason being that the Mail often has to correct & clarify issues raised in his incendiary rabble-rousing:
http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/littlejohn
*EDIT: Should read "a joint parliamentary committee".
Littlejohn alone merits 83 articles on the Tabloid Watch website, the reason being that the Mail often has to correct & clarify issues raised in his incendiary rabble-rousing:
http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/littlejohn
*EDIT: Should read "a joint parliamentary committee".
Quite why Dacre had to discuss Littlejohn's articles to the Leveson inquiry is a bit odd.
Sorry, that was my mistake, Al. It was actually a "joint parliamentary committee".
Oh ok. I'm sure I'll forgive you.
Help! I'm being oppressed! 
a) You are a mail reader so while you are really fine with black and gay people but on the quiet you wouldn't want them as neighbors. Not unless they were a surgeon perhaps. You are that normal privileged middle class white kid who thinks he is really modern but in the end varies little from generation to generation and b) you plainly stated that you think traditional family life is under attack. You said
So you think traditional family life is under attack but not from gay marriage resulting in childrearing? What are you worried about then? Illegal migrant gay whales against the bomb demanding IVF on the National Health?
If however you have no problem with gay couples raising children why are you concerned about traditional family life. This sure as shit isn't traditional but you allegedly approve or at least don't mind. Something doesn't quite ring true. And can you really say that you don't think that gay parents might corrupt their offspring? Odd Mail reader if you can.
You don't have much to do with the various varieties of blended families do you? Kids are remarkably resilient. The right of politics should be concerned that their wealth gathering and the resultant disenfranchisement of the lower socio-economic end of the spectrum is causing the social break down that is damaging kids. Love, stability and community are what kids need even if this isn't within the traditional modular family. And that included financial stability and hope for the future.
Agreed. Nothing is ever as simple as one thing or another.
But if you live in a nice supportive, relatively wealthy, middle class suburb you will find that kids cope far far better with blended family issues than they do when in an inner city deprived area, on average of course.
Labels are so much cheaper and easier.
Reminds me of the Dan Sabbagh article on Speccie editor, Fraser Nelson, when he defended Rod Liddle.
Defending the indefensible there; Liddle's a bit of a standing joke even amongst the press mob. These types think their activities are 'a bit of a wheeze', and can't understand why the public sometimes takes issue with their conduct.
Yeah. Seems these editors develop as us v them approach, batten down the hatches, and defend their writer at all costs. The hits from the article outweigh the controversy and offence caused. I actually like Fraser Nelson though, despite disagreeing with just about everything he believes. He always comes across well and his magazine, besides Liddle, is a good read. A world apart from Dacre.
Whenever these dickheads receive backlash now they just chalk it up as internet hysteria.
According to an email I received, over 200,000(!) people have signed the petition calling for Richard Littlejohn to be fired out of a cannon...I mean, sacked.
And exploiting the deaths of 6 children to write an ideologically influenced article is definitely not vile.
Why do people keep buying this shit?
Why do people keep buying this shit?
fecking hell, the Daily Mail never fail to outdo themselves do they?
"Vile cnut" would have done.
In tomorrow's issue: Liz Jones lives for an hour in a cardboard box outside Harvey Nichols.
Now for the fun part, alastair's attempts to out-cnut that frontpage.
Bet derby county and buy mobiles are loving the free advertising
That darn lowest class at it again.
Naturally, the Mail Online has exclusive pictures from inside the burned-out 'house of horror'...for the bloodthirsty voyeurs they assume make up their readership.
You read far too much of the Mail Steve. I'm starting to consider you a questionable citizen.
I'm surprised they didn't go with "6-Nil! - Future Scroungers Incinerated"
what they missed was this guy is typical of everyone on welfare.
I cannot believe the beginning of that frontpage story; it's written as if the 'scandalous' benefits Philpott received are more important than the fact that he's a childkiller who's just been convicted (which, you'd think, would be the main, most relevant story). Apparently, continuing the War on the Poor takes priority over children's lives...
It's almost like they are saying being on benefits turned him into a murderer.
I wonder if people use the mail as a 'get the most out of the benefits system' guide.
I really don't understand that. It's a newspaper right? Those are supposed to be news, aren't they? Or is it some sort of editorial opinion or extra Sunday magazine?
And I thought some of our newspapers are bad. The worst do choose sensationalist and crappy news, but they don't put them like that.
And I thought some of our newspapers are bad. The worst do choose sensationalist and crappy news, but they don't put them like that.
It is a newspaper, but it tends to resemble extreme right wing propaganda and hate speech more than journalism.
Our tabloids are notoriously awful. In America they don't really care about written news, but have some good ones, but have mental, popular TV news. In the UK we're the opposite.
Quick guide.
The Mail is the right wing nutcase paper for the wives of bankers and small village entrepreneurs who think they're better than everyone and deserve it. It specialises in scaremongering about the ill effects of liberal causes, the poor and foreigners. It thinks Britain was at it's best in the 1950s. Has a schizophrenic attitude to young girls, which it demonstrates by demonising anyone with any remote connection sexually to them, whilst constantly printing glossy sexploitation stories about the newly turned 16 daughters of celebrities. Notoriously supported both Hitler & British Fascism back in the day.
The Express is the Mail for people who think the Mail is too globally focused and aimed at people who live in small villages who aren't entrepreneurs and don't read the Mail. It hates everything that isn't British, loves the royals more than anyone, and thinks that Britain was better off in the 1950s and bits of the 1890s when we still had an empire. It thinks the EU is evil and trying to poison us all.
The Sun is the right wing nutcase paper for Working Class scafolders who like tits and their news based on people who've ended up in A&E setting fire to their own farts. Over the last decade it's followed the Mail (and then some) in focusing on gossip and reality TV to the point where almost every front page will be about non-celebs, soap stars or what was on TV last night. Has schizophrenia about scrounging working class types and scaremongers about everything the Mail does, whilst being aimed at and bought by the very same people it's scaremongering about. It thinks Britain was at it's best in the 1970s when misogynist jokes, sex comedies and light racist banter were the pinnacle of culture. It will nevertheless also witch hunt people for any misogyny or light racism, whilst also excusing it in it's editorial pages. It's the biggest selling paper in the country. Kill me.
The Star is The Sun for people who think The Sun has too much news in it. 400% of it's stories are made up and it's engaged in a permanent competition with itself to invent the most eyecathingly ridiculous made up front page headlines.
The Mirror is (or was) the left wing nutcase counter part paper to The Sun, with just as much made up bollocks and celebrity gossip only without the schizophrenia of hating the Working Class. Since Piers Morgan's tenure it's basically just been The Sun, only taking deliberately contrary positions to it.
All of these sell more than any broadsheet.
The Independent & The Times have (relatively) recently turned tabloid, but only in format. They're still ostensibly actual newspapers.
Quick guide.
The Mail is the right wing nutcase paper for the wives of bankers and small village entrepreneurs who think they're better than everyone and deserve it. It specialises in scaremongering about the ill effects of liberal causes, the poor and foreigners. It thinks Britain was at it's best in the 1950s. Has a schizophrenic attitude to young girls, which it demonstrates by demonising anyone with any remote connection sexually to them, whilst constantly printing glossy sexploitation stories about the newly turned 16 daughters of celebrities. Notoriously supported both Hitler & British Fascism back in the day.
The Express is the Mail for people who think the Mail is too globally focused and aimed at people who live in small villages who aren't entrepreneurs and don't read the Mail. It hates everything that isn't British, loves the royals more than anyone, and thinks that Britain was better off in the 1950s and bits of the 1890s when we still had an empire. It thinks the EU is evil and trying to poison us all.
The Sun is the right wing nutcase paper for Working Class scafolders who like tits and their news based on people who've ended up in A&E setting fire to their own farts. Over the last decade it's followed the Mail (and then some) in focusing on gossip and reality TV to the point where almost every front page will be about non-celebs, soap stars or what was on TV last night. Has schizophrenia about scrounging working class types and scaremongers about everything the Mail does, whilst being aimed at and bought by the very same people it's scaremongering about. It thinks Britain was at it's best in the 1970s when misogynist jokes, sex comedies and light racist banter were the pinnacle of culture. It will nevertheless also witch hunt people for any misogyny or light racism, whilst also excusing it in it's editorial pages. It's the biggest selling paper in the country. Kill me.
The Star is The Sun for people who think The Sun has too much news in it. 400% of it's stories are made up and it's engaged in a permanent competition with itself to invent the most eyecathingly ridiculous made up front page headlines.
The Mirror is (or was) the left wing nutcase counter part paper to The Sun, with just as much made up bollocks and celebrity gossip only without the schizophrenia of hating the Working Class. Since Piers Morgan's tenure it's basically just been The Sun, only taking deliberately contrary positions to it.
All of these sell more than any broadsheet.
The Independent & The Times have (relatively) recently turned tabloid, but only in format. They're still ostensibly actual newspapers.
As for the Telegraph...on any subject, the first "Readers' Comment" will be about Europe taking us to hell in a handcart.
The Telegraph & The Guardian are essentially the mirror papers for the right & left wing. Both actually report news and have reporters that want to find out proper stories (though ones that reflect their bent) but to each side the other one is an evil propaganda machine. (Being liberal, I don't like the Torygraph, but respect it as a lesser evil than the above comics)
The Times also falls under this, whilst being a Murdoch paper, but still manages somehow to come out with some credibility. I've no idea how this has happened. It's also the only paper that charges people to view it's online version. Like cnuts.
There's also The Observer, but genuinely no one gives a shit about it.
The Times also falls under this, whilst being a Murdoch paper, but still manages somehow to come out with some credibility. I've no idea how this has happened. It's also the only paper that charges people to view it's online version. Like cnuts.
There's also The Observer, but genuinely no one gives a shit about it.
The Sun & Telegraph are soon to introduce paywalls, chief. I don't mind the Telegraph, so I'll miss it a little.