Stop Funding Hate - Pathetic!

[highflyer]

It is virtue signalling pure and simple. Is it going to affect your life? No, because you don't read the paper but it lets you show off your SJW credentials.

Three cheers for Saint Lily Allen of Calais.

How do you know that the lies these papers tell, or the attacks on those that oppose them, don't affect my life? Or the life of those around me?

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

DM readers - the bete noire of the chattering classes. If in doubt, mention the DM and let the 2-minute hate begin.

Just seems that most of the arguments flying around can be attributed to both sides here...

 

[highflyer]

How do you know that the lies these papers tell, or the attacks on those that oppose them, don't affect my life? Or the life of those around me?

I am not Gary Lineker btw

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

How do you know that the lies these papers tell, or the attacks on those that oppose them, don't affect my life? Or the life of those around me?

Mindreading action figure, comes with 12 issues of the DM.

 

[Baldseagull]

Mail and Mirror

View attachment 79375

View attachment 79376

Loving that Daily Mail article, straight into National Pride and claiming football as a foreign idea we have taken to. Incredible.

 

[Buzzer]

How do you know that the lies these papers tell, or the attacks on those that oppose them, don't affect my life? Or the life of those around me?

Because newspapers reflect their readership rather than vice versa. If the newspaper didn't exist then the same people with the same views would still exist.

We all know that the Daily Mail is just a totem that people of a certain mindset always use as their go-to hate symbol when they need their 2-minute hate fix and this is all this campaign is about.

 

[Buzzer]

A bit like The Daily Mails attitude to The UK being a member of The EU then.

One is about trying to stop private companies advertising in newspapers and the other is about a country's membership of a transcontinental economic and political union so...no, they're not a bit like each other no matter the relative virtues of each argument.

 

[Diego Napier]

We all know that the Daily Mail is just a totem that people of a certain mindset always read when they need their 2-minute hate fix./QUOTE]

Even more apposite.

 

[Biscuit]

So much virtue-signalling.

Wah, Wah! I don't like something. It mustn't be allowed to exist.

You've got issues, Buzzer.

 

[Buzzer]

Even more apposite.

So you would agree that the hateful DM readers and the people who love wearing their anti-DM credentials so noisily on their Facebook updates are just different sides of the same coin. Are you going to tell them or shall I?

 

[Buzzer]

You've got issues, Buzzer.

Oh dear. Because I don't take these kind of campaigns seriously, you think I have issues. Hate to burst your bubble but I think the people with issues are a little closer to home.

 

[Biscuit]

Oh dear. Because I don't take these kind of campaigns seriously, you think I have issues. Hate to burst your bubble but I think the people with issues are a little closer to home.

Alright mate, I can see that chip on your shoulder from here

 

[Monkey Man]

Since the question of being a "liberal" has become an interesting strand of this thread, I'll throw in my theory, which is that being liberal, to me at least, simply means being kind, considerate of others (and their viewpoints), generous, outward looking, and basically trying to use what intelligence you have when confronted with a problem. You'd like to think that's the base point for every human being, rather than an extreme position to adopt.

Of course some people aren't kind or outward looking, and close their minds to all kinds of ideas. That's their choice, but I don't think it's fair or accurate to describe them as "the normal people" and say that the liberals are all lefties/luvvies/out of touch.

 

[Buzzer]

Alright mate, I can see that chip on your shoulder from here

No chip here. I can't stand the Daily Mail but I don't deign to tell others what they can and can't do just to make myself feel better. Nice bit of double-standards by yourself there btw. Post 272 you rip the piss out of DM readers and it's pats on the back all round. I take the piss out of SJWs and you proclaim that I have issues.

Generation snowflake.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Since the question of being a "liberal" has become an interesting strand of this thread, I'll throw in my theory, which is that being liberal, to me at least, simply means being kind, considerate of others (and their viewpoints), generous, outward looking, and basically trying to use what intelligence you have when confronted with a problem. You'd like to think that's the base point for every human being, rather than an extreme position to adopt.

Of course some people aren't kind or outward looking, and close their minds to all kinds of ideas. That's their choice, but I don't think it's fair or accurate to describe them as "the normal people" and say that the liberals are all lefties/luvvies/out of touch.

By your definition I would hope to be called a liberal ! I do think though that those positive attributes in your first paragraph can be used to describe people across the political spectrum. There is though a distinction between ones take on political issues that comes from a fundamentally tory, liberal or left leaning outlook on life that is independent of those positive human characteristics.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

So you would agree that the hateful DM readers and the people who love wearing their anti-DM credentials so noisily on their Facebook updates are just different sides of the same coin. Are you going to tell them or shall I?

Facebook is for lemmings though, mobile phones are for lemmings. George Orwell probably predicted this dystopian hell decades ago, no free will, all of our aggression and collective neuroses channelled through some vacuous online hell known as North Stand Chat, although in his book I think he called it North Star Cvnts. Oh and what did you think of the new John Lewis advert, fvck off!

 

[Monkey Man]

By your definition I would hope to be called a liberal ! I do think though that those attributes can be used to describe people across the political spectrum. There is though a distinction between ones take on political issues that comes from a fundamentally tory, liberal or left leaning outlook on life that is independent of those positive human characteristics.

Yep, I would agree with that actually. I don't vote Tory but I recognise that there some very decent Conservatives and in fact one of the most liberal steps this country has ever taken - the introduction of gay marriage - was the work of a Tory prime minister.

A discussion perhaps for another day is that the left-right political spectrum is probably past its sell-by date as a means of looking at political viewpoints. There have been some interesting articles on that subject since the Brexit vote.

 

[Hastings gull]

I think the fact there is a movement called Stop Funding Hate, that are targeting advertisers of the DM, is proof that the people have had enough of the hate that paper spouts,

You can called it a splinter group or a pressure group or whatever you like - it's having an effect and many people are behind it,

Are they? "Many" sounds good, doesn't it? It adds a bit of credence. My definition of "many" would be to say that many readers of the three papers will simply ignore the "many"

 

[Hastings gull]

I'll take pressure group as it clearly is. As an aside Some of the right wing pant-pissers on this thread would have you think pressure groups have never existed before.

I see that the two-homes hypocrite is joining in with a very sensible contribution about those dreadful right-wingers.

 

[Two Professors]

If it were about expressing different views it would be targeting the Telegraph. It isn't. This is about hitting back at papers that lie. And spread hate. And use their power to undermine democracy. These papers exist to enhance the interests of their billionaire owners, not to provide an 'alternative viewpoint. To not understand that is to be naive.

Papers that lie?Are the Morning Star and the Socialist Worker lolol still in publication then?
Socialist Worker-biggest oxymoron ever!