A message from some of your friends on the UK Forum re. Daily Mail

mr blur

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-31-07 11:03 AM
Original message

A message from some of your friends on the UK Forum re. Daily Mail

We in the UK Forum often notice threads on DU in which the Daily Mail is cited as a source.

We would never dream of telling people what they should or shouldn't read - or believe. We just wanted to explain why we roll our eyes and sigh every time the Daily Mail is quoted on DU.

Obviously, if DU-ers saw the Daily Mail every day you would, quite rightly, quickly make up your own minds about it. We certainly have no intention of patronising DU users on GD - but just as most of us had never heard of, say, Rush Lambaugh before coming to DU, many of you might not be familiar with this newspaper which gets quoted so often. Our view is, naturally, formed from a progressive, "liberal" stance.

For those of you not familiar with this crappy little right-wing tabloid, let me put it this way: It's as if a DU-er in the US posted a story and cited Ann Coulter as the source; there may possibly be some fact or, indeed, truth in what she says but who among you would feel comfortable accepting her as the primary source?

It may be helpful to know that during the 1930s the Daily Mail supported Nazism and Fascism - its controller, Lord Rothermere was a friend and supporter of both Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler.

These days the Mail is, I would say. the most right-wing British newspaper. Its popularity is with what we think of as Middle England - a section of the population that's hard to pin down but, I would say, is characterised by reactionary politics, fear of anything which threatens their comfortable little lives (immigrants, anyone under the age of 21, anyone who isn't white and doesn't love the queen - you know the kind of people I mean. They feel that the country started going downhill when we gave India back to its inhabitants). It tries to present itself as a serious newspaper but really it's obsessed with celebrities, minor royals, "Britishness" (whatever that is) etc.

The ideal Mail front page would feature a story in which a poor oppressed white British female christian employee was being "persecuted" for demanding the right to wear some vulgar symbol of her "faith" to work even though it contravenes the dress code to which she agreed when she took the job. If they could also work in something about Muslim doctors they would be ecstatic, and so would their readers.

Going back to Ann Coulter, the Mail is probably the only daily paper here which would feature her views without a hint of irony or condemnation.

The Mail's "Star" columnist - Richard Littlejohn - lives in a mansion in Florida, a location from which he happily pontificates about What's Wrong With Britain Since Churchill Died. He is a loud-mouthed bigot, and he fits in perfectly in Mail Land.

The Daily Mail is rabidly anti-reproductive choice, uses the words "homosexual agenda", engages with 'War on Terror' stories with the gusto of FOX News, and is supportive of pseudoscience and medical scare stories without foundation.

To quote a UD DU-er in the UK Forum:

"Right after Bill Clinton was elected the first time, the U.S. press was full of scare stories about British and Canadian health care.

A social group I belonged to was discussing theses stories over dinner when a newer member spoke up and said that he had lived in the UK for nine years, and that the papers the scare stories came from (The Daily Mail and The Sun) were the British equivalent of the National Enquirer."

A sampling of Mail front-pages, originally reported on the fantastic http://www.MailWatch.co.uk

Whipping up fear of Muslims:

Xenophobic nonsense:

Those evil Muslims again:

The gay PC-brigade going after those poor Christians:

Scare story bullshit:

Standing up for that most disadvantaged group, white men:

Yes, gosh there's people having sex.:

Stigmatising the poor, the unemployed, foreigners and Muslims in one swoop:

OMG the Bible is banned!!!1 Except that the story turned out to be bullshit:

Just in case there's any doubt. Here's the Mail reporting Bush's victory in 2004:

A link to Wikipedia on the Mail, which gives a pretty balanced picture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail

The Sun and the Daily Express also share some of the Mail's traits and prejudices, atlhough The Sun is mainly concerned with breasts, soccer and television soap stars (and preferably a "story" which includes all three) and the Express is still trying to come to terms with the fact that Diana's dead and was either murdered, abducted by aliens or probably blown up by dark-skinned men with beards. Or Prince Charles. Or his dad.

- Those Pinko Commie chip-eating Eurotrash,

mr blur
LeftishBrit
Anarcho-Socialist
non-sociopath-skin
Thankfully-in-Britain
Mr. Creosote
Nihil