The Daily Mail...

[TWOCHOICEStom]

For reasons unknown I found myself on the homepage of the Mail and was greeted by two photos of mass murder, FOLLOWED BY a caption warning of graphic content. Too late I've already bloody seen it.

I've seen lots online about these horrible events in Kenya and Iraq, but purposefully avoided clicking links to any images. I don't want to see dead bodies being stacked up or people being shot in the head.

I've never seen a paper run images like this without warning. Is it normal? Should I be surprised? Or did I get what I deserve for going to this scummy paper's site in the first place?

 

[TomandJerry]

You only have yourself to blame for this

 

[father_and_son]

It is also equally important that The Mail runs a story a day about the objectification of women or celebrities chasing young girls or how p*rnography causes men to rape, while the whole of the right hand side of the screen is devoted to pictures of bikini/lingerie clad young women tenuously connected to some non-story.

 

[poidy]

I like the Daily Mail

 

[lawros left foot]

You only have yourself to blame for this

Not of you're Tony Blair you don't

 

[wellquickwoody]

This is what The Daily Mail does - it exists to provoke rage, fear and hatred onto its readers with shocking blown up images and SENSATIONALISED headlines.

Naturally it's getting a bit overexcited at the moment with the goings on in Iraq, it's having a field day with those kind of photos hoping that anyone that sees them will hate Muslims as much as they do.

Is it not their responsibility to report this story, an actual happening, and show the images that accompany the story so that we are aware of what is going on in the world? Or should they hide the story away, and keep the nasty images hidden from view in case we all have nightmares?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Is it not their responsibility to report this story, an actual happening, and show the images that accompany the story so that we are aware of what is going on in the world? Or should they hide the story away, and keep the nasty images hidden from view in case we all have nightmares?

This. I would have thought the people that did it should be more at guilt than the people who reported it.

 

[Buzzer]

This is what The Daily Mail does - it exists to provoke rage, fear and hatred onto its readers

...and its non-readers. I don't read the DM but I do love how it gets certain people so worked up. It's excellent marketing.

with shocking blown up images and SENSATIONALISED headlines.

All those images shown on the Daily Mail website were shown on Al-Jazeera. In fact Al-Jazeera makes a big thing of not shying away from showing its readers the horrors that occur on a daily basis and it's broadcast some pretty gruesome stuff before, much worse than those on the DM website. Why is it okay for a news channel that you like, to show those images but not a newspaper that you hate?

 

[W.C.]

erm, isn't the OP's point that the warning came AFTER the pictures?

 

[Buzzer]

All papers are reporting the events in Iraq - but only in the Daily Mail will they have a headline like this "The bodies keep piling up: From Kenya to Iraq shocking new images show how a wave of Islamist carnage has signalled a new era of barbaric terror across the world" - This isn't reporting news, they have a clear agenda to make people fear and hate Muslims. It's genuinely quite scary that it's the best selling paper in the country.

Maybe not a headline but even the Guardian reported this about ISIS just a few days ago:

The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis) is so hardline that it was disavowed by al-Qaida's leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Isis now presents itself as an ideologically superior alternative to al-Qaida within the jihadi community...As such it has increasingly become a transnational movement with immediate objectives far beyond Iraq and Syria

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/isis-too-extreme-al-qaida-terror-jihadi

Maybe not as sensationalist as the Daily Mail but essentially the same message to its readers.

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

erm, isn't the OP's point that the warning came AFTER the pictures?

Yes. Yes it is.

I don't give a shit who shows/doesn't show it. It shouldn't be chucked in your face like that.

 

[wellquickwoody]

All papers are reporting the events in Iraq - but only in the Daily Mail will they have a headline like this "The bodies keep piling up: From Kenya to Iraq shocking new images show how a wave of Islamist carnage has signalled a new era of barbaric terror across the world" - This isn't reporting news, it's blatant scaremongering, they have an obvious agenda to make people fear and hate Muslims. It's genuinely quite scary that it's the best selling paper in the country.

The thread was about the use of images which clearly illustrate the brutality occurring in parts of the world right now. What part of that do you think we should not see?

 

[Nibble]

I don't think the Mail should really be taken seriously on global issues. I do enjoy a nice human interest story mixed with right wing politics when done by the Mail though, such as this gem from a while back:

"Drama Teacher who organised Thatcher death parties remains unrepentant as it's revealed she had NHS breast implants"

A shambles of a headline in itself but with their poor use of the English language they have implied Thatcher had NHS breast implants.

 

[daveinprague]

On one hand, I think that people should see the reality of war, and terrorism...but on the other hand, if its in the papers everyday, it loses its shock value.
Having followed ISIS for about a year now via videos ive noticed I feel nothing at all watching even the most harrowing shit...think its a fine line...

 

[narly101]

Having followed ISIS for about a year now

Do you have their twitter account, please?

 

[daveinprague]

Do you have their twitter account, please?

You can see their 'work' on liveleak, although, i dont doubt they will have twitter, FB, and other social network sites.

 

[User removed 4]

For reasons unknown I found myself on the homepage of the Mail and was greeted by two photos of mass murder, FOLLOWED BY a caption warning of graphic content. Too late I've already bloody seen it.

I've seen lots online about these horrible events in Kenya and Iraq, but purposefully avoided clicking links to any images. I don't want to see dead bodies being stacked up or people being shot in the head.

I've never seen a paper run images like this without warning. Is it normal? Should I be surprised? Or did I get what I deserve for going to this scummy paper's site in the first place?

OK I'll have a wild stab in the dark, you logged onto the daily mail website ??

 

[albionite]

Did you think it was a scummy newspaper before or after you "stumbled" across it

 

[Sussax]

Some people on here need to man up.

 

[BBassic]

"Drama Teacher who organised Thatcher death parties remains unrepentant as it's revealed she had NHS breast implants"

A shambles of a headline in itself but with their poor use of the English language they have implied Thatcher had NHS breast implants.