Daily Mail/ Wikipedia

[Tom Bombadil]

The Guardian is just as bad as the daily mail just in a different way. Constantly looking for excuses to explain terrorism rather than just accepting it is evil people doing evil things.

Yeah terrorism is just evil people doing evil things, no point trying to understand why people do the things they do, it's not like we could learn something and you know try to prevent it, cos it's just evil people who do evil things and there's no explaining that.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Can't you see the prejudice in what you've written there? Are you so lacking in self awareness?

I think you might be prejudiced in judging my prejudice. I am not claiming to be a totally independent and unbiased arbiter.

I do not like the Daily Mail and I think its (so called) journalism stinks. It is the most biased and prejudiced paper in this country by quite a long way.

And I don't think your own reputation is for being a warm and cuddly liberal leftie.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Not really challenging your opinion on the Mail or the Guardian, more your "Lineker is a decent bloke ".
This is the bloke that left his wife and children for a younger model when his wife and kids were going through a bad time. This is the bloke who was on that quiz show and used to have snidey digs at others, namely Vinnie Jones and he crapped himself and went into slippery creep mode when Jones appeared on the show. This is also the bloke that thought it was funny when Ian Wright got pumped from MOTD, some nasty snide remarks on social media. Let's not forget that Wright was third in line to have his say at HT and FT and often his views had already been stated by the previous pundits.
I think Lineker is a nasty piece.

Fair enough. I must admit I was quite surprised - nay disappointed, when he went for the younger model....... and felt a certain amount of schadenfreude when it ended.

But I had more in mind the views he has expressed on immigration etc which is part of what the Mail didn't like.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Well said. The fascists of the left won't be happy till all right-wing media are silenced. Free speech is in real danger from the guardianistas. Whatever happened to "I disagree completely with what you say but I would fight to the death for your right to say it"? Such an idea seems incomprehensible to so many on the (supposedly liberal) left today, including on here.

Who do you have in mind 'on here'? Not me I hope. If you think that criticising the Daily Mail renders a person a 'guardianista' intent on silencing (I can't be bothered to retype your twaddle) then you are an idiot. Now get this. The Mail has every right to print anything it likes. The public have every right to buy the Mail, read it, massage their balls with it, whatever. Wikipedia has every right to deem it unreliable. Now sod off.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Oh it does my cucked little friend. When you calm down from your crazed rage(Did you see what I did there?) You may ask your self a couple of questions? Has wikipedia become staffed with leftists? Why not include the whole of fleet street and CNN?

Maybe it doesn't fit with your whiny narrative, when stripped away reveals this leftist wankfest nothing more than dipping a toe into authoritarianism.


So keep on crying, I bath in your tears.

Get some help. Seriously.

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

Fair enough. I must admit I was quite surprised - nay disappointed, when he went for the younger model....... and felt a certain amount of schadenfreude when it ended.

But I had more in mind the views he has expressed on immigration etc which is part of what the Mail didn't like.

But who said it all occured when his wife was going through a bad time? the Daily Mail perhaps?

 

[beorhthelm]

But who said it all occured when his wife was going through a bad time? the Daily Mail perhaps?

glad im not the only one thinking along those lines, dont recall this "bad time", nor that he left the first wife for Danielle.

 

[brightn'ove]

Oh it does my cucked little friend. When you calm down from your crazed rage(Did you see what I did there?) You may ask your self a couple of questions? Has wikipedia become staffed with leftists? Why not include the whole of fleet street and CNN?

Maybe it doesn't fit with your whiny narrative, when stripped away reveals this leftist wankfest nothing more than dipping a toe into authoritarianism.


So keep on crying, I bath in your tears.

You nearly completed alt-right bingo. You're just missing the pepe avatar and a #MAGA

 

[BadFish]

This discussion should surely be about if a newspaper is printing factual, misleading or downright incorrect information. Wikipedia clearly thinks there is a problem with the integrity of the Daily Mail (something the press complaints commission appears to agree with) and this is a concern (surely for all, especially their readership).

To attempt to set this debate up ans being about freedom of speech or opinion is disingenuous at best. This is about journalistic integrity and the usefulness of an organisation's information when used as reference material. IMHO the standards of journalism in the UK should be a concern for people of all political persuasions and to somehow attempt to manufacture a left v right debate on this issue is folly at best and willful misdirection at worst.

Once again the polarisation of opinion stifles and derails the debate on NSC. It is interesting to me that of all the post on this thread no-one has defended the integrity of The Daily Mail nor denied that they are biased and print a large amount of innaccuracies.

I have no doubt that to some this lament of the middle ground of politics will be seen as liberal leftism.

 

[looney]

You nearly completed alt-right bingo. You're just missing the pepe avatar and a #MAGA

Is this close enough? One of my favourites.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

But who said it all occured when his wife was going through a bad time? the Daily Mail perhaps?

It was Soulman who introduced the Lineker wife bit, not the Daily Mail to be fair - or at least not as far as I am aware.

And it was more about Lineker not being totally above reproach, so a legitimate response.