The ultimate Daily Mail article?

[Donkmeister]

I just found this article on the Daily Mail website:

"£500,000 Lottery cash spent on studying drug use by gays"

Has anyone ever found a more "Daily Mail" article? At the bottom of the article they even manage to throw in something about Peruvians eating guinnea pigs!

I think that if they could throw in some paedophiles and something about terrorists this would be an absolute perfect score for a Daily Mail article.

 

[nickso]

i only sped through this but i didnt see any reference to polish, immigrants, muslim, benefits, al quada (sp), normal life, non prejudice....blah blah blah.

seems quite tame for those nazi's.

 

[blondini]

Well I'm with the Vicar of Preston.


Er, not like that.

 

[billy bob]

But it is a waste of money, our money, so it needs to be reported, why would money be needed to fund research into gays taking drugs, drugs are drugs, they are bad for you and could kill you, do gays have some kind of immunity to drugs, No, they are the same as everybody else, so it is wasting money that could be used for far more important this

 

[crockett]

It does make me chuckle when I read on here, 'Oh, you must be a Daily Mail reader because......' or whatever.

Since when does what paper you read constitute what type of person you are?

The Mail and The Sun both have been reporting on The Ross / Brand debacle, the difference being that the Sun writes about what the Granddaughter thought of Brand in the sack !!!

In fact, on reading through both the sun and the mail on thursday, the only difference was the headlines in the papers. the content was pretty much the same. So whats the problem with which paper you read ??

 

[nickso]

. the content was pretty much the same. So whats the problem with which paper you read ??

it doesnt matter if you read it or what the source was. it does matter if you believe it to be true and then go and tell everyone else that it is.

 

[crockett]

That's the point I was trying to make, Nickso We have so many media sources nowadays that I'm sure an informed, logical choice can differentiate what is fact, fiction or hype. I just wondered why certain people on this site pidgeonhole others based on the paper they read ?? Crazy

 

[Donkmeister]

That's the point I was trying to make, Nickso We have so many media sources nowadays that I'm sure an informed, logical choice can differentiate what is fact, fiction or hype. I just wondered why certain people on this site pidgeonhole others based on the paper they read ?? Crazy

I think it's exactly BECAUSE of the different sources that people make a joke about the Daily Mail. In the same way that I hear the Telegraph referred to as the Torygraph because it is so Conservative.

When I've read the Daily Mail, it always comes across as a bit of a rant, like it was written by that Harry Enfield character... you know, "I'm all for Formula One, but if that Damon Hill was to drive through my cul-de-sac at 180mph, I should say OI DAMON! NO!". It doesn't focus on the bigger picture, rather it prefers to explode the part of the story its readership finds most contentious.

You read the Telegraph and it blames everything on Labour. You read the Morning Star and it blames everything on Maggie. You read the Daily Mail, and it blames everything on the gays/paedos/French/etc!

There was a brilliant Top Tip in Viz last month: "Daily Mail editors: confuse your readers by writing an article that claims asylum seekers are the natural predator of paedophiles"

 

[crockett]

Ok, so you've categorised most readers............. what about Sun, Star or Sport readers then ?

Still think it's a crock of s*!*e. Doesn't matter what paper you read, programme you watch, clothes you wear or where you shop.