Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DTMark

The Daily Telegraph

Recommended Posts

Ah, the Daily Telegraph. That paragon of virtue.

I recall a day not so long ago when most of the news items were relegated down the page because someone had posited that Noah's Ark was real, or something like that.

OK, it's better than the Daily Mail, but then that really is the stuff you scrape off the bottom of your shoe, so that's not saying very much. It does seem to be converging with the Daily Mail though.

Here's the front page at the moment. I sometimes wonder if any of the editors ever actually sit back and look at it.

telegraph.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, the Daily Telegraph. That paragon of virtue.

I recall a day not so long ago when most of the news items were relegated down the page because someone had posited that Noah's Ark was real, or something like that.

It was a fine piece of journalism, Mr DT. I know it used to be very Tory, and had no apologies for that, but all the media has a bias, but what is it now?

Probably very close to a joke! These are fine articles, worthy of telling the World about? Perhaps not! :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the daily mail website is one of the worlds most viewed. Looks like the other dying newspapers are trying to emulate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the daily mail website is one of the worlds most viewed. Looks like the other dying newspapers are trying to emulate it.

yes it is - it's the site to place a story if you want to generate publicity - providing good supporting images is essential, however - coverage in the Mail online will ensure your story will rapidly get coverage in other papers and websites around the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the daily mail website is one of the worlds most viewed. Looks like the other dying newspapers are trying to emulate it.

Correct and correct again. Overuses "The Hilarious Moment...." phrase quite a bit, but they do deserve a hat tip for tapping into something and staying there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until now, I don't think I have ever actually looked at the Daily Mail website before, I did pick up a printed copy someone had put down in a waiting room and found it depressing that someone had paid money to buy it in the first place.

Just looked at it now.

What the f***? Shouldn't it be called "Nazis online"? What a truly odious, nasty piece of work that is.

Mystery of 'Maria' deepens: Greek authorities reveal four-year-old blonde girl 'abducted by gypsies' can only speak Roma language

Muslim convert who wanted to impose Sharia Law on East End of London threatened to kill non-Muslim passers-by for drinking beer

Benefits cheat who spent £16,000 on Spanish holidays is banned from going out at the weekends to stop her flying ABROAD

Unemployed father who kept £30,000 of gold bars and coins in his council flat kitchen is distraught after they were stolen

Chinese couple face jail after selling their baby daughter for £5,000 to buy an iPhone

Mother suffers infestation of false widow spider and kills 23 of them in ONE day

Do answer me this...I gave up on Urban Britain six years ago and live in a cottage in the countryside. I did make the once a year trip into town and went shopping in Basingstoke last weekend. OK there are far too many buildings, far too close together, but it was fairly inoffensive.

To what extent does the bile above actually represent this country? Did it change in those six years into something completely different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks classy today- usually they have to make do with Pippa's latest shopping exploits or whatever rather than real Duchess pictures.

Your point is spot on of course, it's a tabloid in all but shape, and in the online world the shape is irrelevant. It looks and reads like a tabloid. They even had a "house prices soar" print edition headline in September.

Their policy of not allowing comments on some pieces written by politicos about their latest hare-brained policy adventures etc makes them look like a patsy of the establishment too.

The only reasons to buy it are the crossword and Honest John, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until now, I don't think I have ever actually looked at the Daily Mail website before, I did pick up a printed copy someone had put down in a waiting room and found it depressing that someone had paid money to buy it in the first place.

Just looked at it now.

What the f***? Shouldn't it be called "Nazis online"? What a truly odious, nasty piece of work that is.

Do answer me this...I gave up on Urban Britain six years ago and live in a cottage in the countryside. I did make the once a year trip into town and went shopping in Basingstoke last weekend. OK there are far too many buildings, far too close together, but it was fairly inoffensive.

To what extent does the bile above actually represent this country? Did it change in those six years into something completely different?

I had to highlight that Mark! I thought it was funny, maybe you did not! ;) Still, some of my mates are are real gays, not eGays like you, on the Internet ;) But silliness aside, these newspapers cater for the lowest taste! The T used to be a fine publication!, maybe not exactly your own political flavour, but well written. If they have to compete with the DM, it's all turned horrible! The example headlines you have shown me, show t all! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least it now has a paywall; IIRC, 20 articles in a month and the portcullis comes slamming down. I can never be bothered to simply clear the cookies and am, thus, safe from the DT until the next calendar month. Just need the DM, the Grauniad and a few others to go subscription only and I'll be happily "news"-free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least it now has a paywall; IIRC, 20 articles in a month and the portcullis comes slamming down. I can never be bothered to simply clear the cookies and am, thus, safe from the DT until the next calendar month. Just need the DM, the Grauniad and a few others to go subscription only and I'll be happily "news"-free.

Trouble is, newspapers (and indeed, web pages) carry much more than news. They carry lifestyle articles, and opinions. There's barely enough news to fill one page every day, but they are still 20 pages thick. Obviously a few advertisements too. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble is, newspapers (and indeed, web pages) carry much more than news. They carry lifestyle articles, and opinions. There's barely enough news to fill one page every day, but they are still 20 pages thick. Obviously a few advertisements too. :blink:

That's pretty much my point. I think my life will be *enhanced* by the absence of "lifestyle", opinion, celebrity guff and - of course - advertising. And let's not forget all the organisational puff pieces CTRLC&V'd and presented as news.

In the exceedingly unlikely situation that something's happening that is likely to impact on my life, I'm sure someone will tell me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just "discovering" the Daily Mail after all these years and what people have said about it before.

The Telegraph seems to have become the Daily Mail, and the Daily Mail has grown even worse.

"I'll have a full English, orange juice, and my daily dose of diatribe and hatred for breakfast please".

FWIW the articles in the Daily Mail might well be true at least in part. Though I suspect the emphasis is not an entirely accurate reflection.

I know there's the expression "misery loves company" and bad news sells more than good news.

I therefore think to myself "Is the Daily Mail really an accurate reflection of peoples concerns, or, it is actually giving rise to concerns" and find myself on the latter side of that.

To take immigration, for instance: yes, it was wholly irresponsible to permit the levels of immigration we have seen. This was dangerous because when the economy went into a downturn, this would divide people against each other "those bloody foreigners come over here and nick all our jobs". The right way to debate that is to have political debate. Labour didn't want that, they wanted a client State since immigrants - apparently - tend to be left-leaning when it comes to vote. The Tories love the idea of cheap labour while moaning just today about Britain lacking entrepreneurial spirit. The hypocrisy of both positions is breath-taking.

What you don't do is "blame the immigrants". You can blame politicians. And what you certainly don't do is what Hitler did with the Jews, which is what the Daily Mail really is. Encourage division among people. Immigrants, benefits, biting, spitting, scroungers, unemployed - all the key words are there.

I really do find that odious rag incredible. When I then learn of its circulation and just how many people read it - after all, if they didn't read it, it wouldn't exist except as some sort of loony fringe thing like the BNP with which there are plenty of parallels I can draw - my faith in humanity takes a massive knock and I wonder if we've gone back a thousand years or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty much my point. I think my life will be *enhanced* by the absence of "lifestyle", opinion, celebrity guff and - of course - advertising. And let's not forget all the organisational puff pieces CTRLC&V'd and presented as news.

In the exceedingly unlikely situation that something's happening that is likely to impact on my life, I'm sure someone will tell me.

Took me ages to get that abbreviation. Sad really, as I work in computers. But I would have said "Esc YY, Esc P". That's how nerdy I am.

I'm pretty sure if any "news" happens, you may hear it here first! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just "discovering" the Daily Mail after all these years and what people have said about it before.

The Telegraph seems to have become the Daily Mail, and the Daily Mail has grown even worse.

"I'll have a full English, orange juice, and my daily dose of diatribe and hatred for breakfast please".

People love it!

It's the mouthpiece for "Outer Party Members" to ridicule the "Proles", whilst drinking their "Victory Gin"! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least it now has a paywall; IIRC, 20 articles in a month and the portcullis comes slamming down. I can never be bothered to simply clear the cookies and am, thus, safe from the DT until the next calendar month. Just need the DM, the Grauniad and a few others to go subscription only and I'll be happily "news"-free.

Out of interest is the times still in business....haven't heard from them for months. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest is the times still in business....haven't heard from them for months. ;)

It's behind a paywall now, so I can't see it! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like that tree in a forest.

More like a turd at a sewage plant! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Telegraph seems to have become the Daily Mail, and the Daily Mail has grown even worse.

All online newspapers are going the same way as far as I can tell. Some of the Guardian's home pages have resembled the Mail's recently, only with a different vocabulary. X-factor live blog FFS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight

Maybe I'm just "discovering" the Daily Mail after all these years and what people have said about it before.

The Telegraph seems to have become the Daily Mail, and the Daily Mail has grown even worse.

"I'll have a full English, orange juice, and my daily dose of diatribe and hatred for breakfast please".

FWIW the articles in the Daily Mail might well be true at least in part. Though I suspect the emphasis is not an entirely accurate reflection.

I know there's the expression "misery loves company" and bad news sells more than good news.

I therefore think to myself "Is the Daily Mail really an accurate reflection of peoples concerns, or, it is actually giving rise to concerns" and find myself on the latter side of that.

To take immigration, for instance: yes, it was wholly irresponsible to permit the levels of immigration we have seen. This was dangerous because when the economy went into a downturn, this would divide people against each other "those bloody foreigners come over here and nick all our jobs". The right way to debate that is to have political debate. Labour didn't want that, they wanted a client State since immigrants - apparently - tend to be left-leaning when it comes to vote. The Tories love the idea of cheap labour while moaning just today about Britain lacking entrepreneurial spirit. The hypocrisy of both positions is breath-taking.

What you don't do is "blame the immigrants". You can blame politicians. And what you certainly don't do is what Hitler did with the Jews, which is what the Daily Mail really is. Encourage division among people. Immigrants, benefits, biting, spitting, scroungers, unemployed - all the key words are there.

I really do find that odious rag incredible. When I then learn of its circulation and just how many people read it - after all, if they didn't read it, it wouldn't exist except as some sort of loony fringe thing like the BNP with which there are plenty of parallels I can draw - my faith in humanity takes a massive knock and I wonder if we've gone back a thousand years or more.

This, is a Very Good Post. I always think of that line by the Jam "And the public wants what the public gets".

I asked this on another thread, without enlightenment, but who are the Jenners and why should anybody be concerned with their lives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest is the times still in business....haven't heard from them for months. ;)

Yes, I picked up a copy today.

Previously, I was against getting involved with Syria but, since the Times have a big picture of a bullet photo-shopped into an unborn child's head on their front cover today, I say lets bomb the hell out of them.

Oh wait, I can form my own opinions, and actually thought what a crassly cynical attempt at propaganda to provoke support for military intervention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I picked up a copy today.

Previously, I was against getting involved with Syria but, since the Times have a big picture of a bullet photo-shopped into an unborn child's head on their front cover today, I say lets bomb the hell out of them.

Oh wait, I can form my own opinions, and actually thought what a crassly cynical attempt at propaganda to provoke support for military intervention.

yes, it's right up there with kuwaitti incubator babies and Gadaffi's viagra-fuelled rape squads in the propaganda ******** league table.

the torygraph has it too:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10390430/Assad-regime-snipers-targeting-unborn-babies.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, it's right up there with kuwaitti incubator babies and Gadaffi's viagra-fuelled rape squads in the propaganda ******** league table.

the torygraph has it too:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10390430/Assad-regime-snipers-targeting-unborn-babies.html

And here's the link to the website of the outfit the Telegraph cites as its source for the imagery...

http://www.syriarelief.org.uk/

No names, no transparency, nothing. Any of us could knock up an identical entity, as a fiction, in an afternoon.

More to the point, the corporate media outlets haven't been adhering to the standards which are supposed to separate them from a bloke posting on the Internet in his underpants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a picture of how much better things will be, for the unborn child, if we got on and intervened. (Its head is hidden somewhere approximately behind the letter 'O')

tomahawk.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, it's right up there with kuwaitti incubator babies and Gadaffi's viagra-fuelled rape squads in the propaganda ******** league table.

the torygraph has it too:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10390430/Assad-regime-snipers-targeting-unborn-babies.html

This is why people should search further for news, than WH Smith.

Far more children die of diarhoea, and that is not news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.