Nothing to do with Glasto, however, I believe very important

[.jay.]

Good god, what a vile woman. She obviously is single (who would go there? ), and therefore lacks the insight know that many couples, regardless of sexual orientation, enjoy a little "dabbling" in their relationships.

I just hope he had a bloody good time before he checked out, and that demon drug of cannabis that he smoked, helped him pass without pain.

Edited October 17, 2009 by .jay.

[sums98]

Disgraceful article....hope they get the rap they deserve over it.Stephen Gateley and dangerous lifestyle.wtf..mmm??

Edited October 17, 2009 by sums98

[Lucanesque]

as if homosexuals just cant help themselves and rutt like sex starved animals should they be in close proximity of another male regardless of whether or not they are in a relationship.

[coma girl]

The daily mail never ceases to amaze me with their hate filled bigoted rants, I hope this woman gets in serious trouble for this.

[Lucanesque]

The daily mail never ceases to amaze me with their hate filled bigoted rants, I hope this woman gets in serious trouble for this.

[denwyn]

Just a moron, then.

[bulb]

The Daily Mail.

What a pile of horseradish

For fecks sake.

Well done to that Guardian writer.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[sisterofmercy]

The Daily Mail.

What a pile of horseradish

For fecks sake.

Well done to that Guardian writer.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[llcoolphil]

Charlie Brooker is generally quite the leg-end.

The Dail Fail article is just another example of how pathetic that paper is. It's genuinely disheartening that it has a fairly large circulation.

[Wooderson]

Whilst it may print anything from reactionary to abhorrent in terms of views expressed, one thing that has to be recognised is that the Daily Mail is actually a bloody good newspaper - which is why it has such a good circulation and why it is held in such high regard in journalistic circles

[llcoolphil]

This is a pisstake Philo? Don't see a sarky smiley.

[Billy09]

Anything but a pisstake. Say what you like about some of the stuff in it, but it's probably the best newspaper in the uk.

[maninkilt]

Anything but a pisstake. Say what you like about some of the stuff in it, but it's probably the best newspaper in the uk.

[Wooderson]

Anything but a pisstake. Say what you like about some of the stuff in it, but it's probably the best newspaper in the uk.

[fur_q]

This from tabloid watch just hilights the utter hypocrisy of the mail and is well worth a read Edited October 18, 2009 by fur_q

[StormCrow]

Here's an article on Yahoo about this.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20091018/tuk-a...ry-6323e80.html

[llcoolphil]

I'm confused, in what respect is it "best"? As lifestyle advice for the prejudiced?

[maninkilt]

There is no such thing as a neutral newspaper. Consequently, whichever newspaper you read, they all have content deplored by many people somehere. What do we mean by populist propoganda? Populist views ie views that are popular? Im not sure what the criticism is there - unless you're suggesting a newspaper has an educational role to fulfill, which is patently nonsense. A coincidental relationship with facts? Care to show me a newspaper that can't have the same criticism levelled at it? Awards? Sure The Daily Mail has won awards. What do they count for? Robbie Williams has won an award as Best male Artist. International journalism praise? And the value of that is what? How many international publications do you read on a daily basis to make a judgement on what is and isn't a good foreign newspaper? No, I don't have independent evidence - just a lifetime spent with print journalists from my father to friends working in the industry now. Whether you like it or not, agree or not, The Mail is a respected newspaper in the industry.

Judging what is and isn't a good newspaper isn't about judging its opinion columns, it's about judging how the newspaper is put together, what subjects it covers etc. Anyone care to point me towards a better tabloid newspaper in Britain? And tell me why it's better.

[llcoolphil]

So what you are saying is that you are involved with the industry, not independant and the phrase I used was populist propaganda, take any phrase to pieces and it is rare that the point of the phrase will come out.

If it is a respected paper (again do you have evidece or just your opinion?) this discaceful article should remove that respect.

[irons]

The Daily/Sunday Mail is the most hinious mag ever. They tried to get films like The Exorcist and Texas Chainsaw banned for no real reason. Mary Whitehouse was bad enough, but that lot take the pisss.

[Billy09]

There is no such thing as a neutral newspaper. Consequently, whichever newspaper you read, they all have content deplored by many people somehere. What do we mean by populist propoganda? Populist views ie views that are popular? Im not sure what the criticism is there - unless you're suggesting a newspaper has an educational role to fulfill, which is patently nonsense. A coincidental relationship with facts? Care to show me a newspaper that can't have the same criticism levelled at it? Awards? Sure The Daily Mail has won awards. What do they count for? Robbie Williams has won an award as Best male Artist. International journalism praise? And the value of that is what? How many international publications do you read on a daily basis to make a judgement on what is and isn't a good foreign newspaper? No, I don't have independent evidence - just a lifetime spent with print journalists from my father to friends working in the industry now. Whether you like it or not, agree or not, The Mail is a respected newspaper in the industry.

Judging what is and isn't a good newspaper isn't about judging its opinion columns, it's about judging how the newspaper is put together, what subjects it covers etc. Anyone care to point me towards a better tabloid newspaper in Britain? And tell me why it's better.

[maninkilt]

It's about much more than what's covered, market share, and awards.

I buy my paper hoping to read as unbiased as possible, so that I can form my own opinion based on the (always slightly biased) information I read.

Any paper that clearly seeks to pander to populist opinion will not be able to tell me anything useful, and is worthless to me.

As I said earlier this piece is clearly written by an idiot whose opinions don't matter at all, and I think it would be far better to get upset by people lying who are actually in positions of power.

I read in indy ny the way, is that a tabloid these days nowthat it's smaller?

[glasto'newbie']

Anyone care to point me towards a better tabloid newspaper in Britain? And tell me why it's better.

[llcoolphil]

It's about much more than what's covered, market share, and awards.

I buy my paper hoping to read as unbiased as possible, so that I can form my own opinion based on the (always slightly biased) information I read.

Edited October 18, 2009 by llcoolphil

[Billy09]

Every newspaper has a demographic it targets. The Indy doesn't seem to have an agenda to the same degree as the Daily Mail. There are loads of editorials in the Independent that don't support the status quo. Some articles I agree with (Mark Steel's political views are way left of mainstream incidently), some I find interesting but disagree with, but they are presented in a way that raises debate rather than preaches hate.

I have never seen anything along the subject lines of "gays/immigrants/the PC brigade are destroying the country!" in the Independent.

The BBC regularly receives criticism for "bias" by various groups, despite having noting to do with advertising. Recently this has been from commercial news services at times. I don't see much of an agenda with the BBC, and trust them much more than Sky for example.

I am well used to sifting wheat from chaff when it comes to evidence, and clearly considering commercial interests comes in to that. Headlines and editorials appealing to hate and paranoia are a dead giveaway though.