Not being one to duck below the parapet .........

[blackburn_stevie]

What gives the government the right to enforce a cap on the percentage rates charged by Payday Loan companies and the like?

Let's be honest for a moment. If some bloke, woman or family buy beer, fags, 50" flat screen tvs, Sky packages, iPads, etc rather than pay bills and then are stupid enough to go to one of these Payday loan places, why not just let them not pay the lender, get take to court, fined, not pay the fine and get sent to prison. The kids get taken into Care where, quite frankly, they will be much better off and can anybody tell me who the losers are in this situation?

[charliebird123]

I too read the DM on line.If some posters have a problem with that,i don't care.

[*.*..lola..*.*]

Not that I have to justify myself to anyone, but I read most news stories via Facebook where I'm subscribed to ALL the national daily papers.

If a story really grabs my interest, I tend to read each newspaper's take on it.....including the Daily Mails  ......otherwise I just read whichever one pops up first on my news feed.

What really makes me laugh is the hostility and downright condescension these Daily Mail haters openly display towards other RT posters - what the heck is that all about for goodness sake??

It's only a newspaper people....get over yourselves!

PS #21 Well said, Charlie  

[lost.parrot]

Well I knew given the frequency it gets linked, some just had to be readers, others apparently just closet readers, bless em

I am unclear who ronald is referring to, or this imaginary antagonism  so await his clarification on that matter, assuming he can remember of course
The Beano at least doesn't pretend to be anything other than a comic I have to say

I don't see why anyone has an issue with what is read as such, after all the Beano has been going for 75 years or so

I doubt whether sensible people believe everything they read, though the operative word there is sensible of course. Naturally if you want to get worked up over imaginary stories, some dating back years and served as a current dish, it opens up all sorts of possibilities

[lost.parrot]

I almost missed Ronald, how remiss of me

I babble on about"  ??  I thought you were a RT reader, as well as a contributor.

Yes babble on. Do you have a translation of the last bit,  or is it encrypted?

You thought right.

I normally do, but that was your own account, rather than mine

No.. you'd be right.

No, I was correct the first time.ftfy

Did anyone say it was your link? I said the latest link was a 7 year old story, try to keep up.

[upthecreekyetagain]

I regularly read the Daily Mail

What is the point in reading a 'newspaper' that corresponds with your own political and/or moral standpoint? - all that does is reinforce your own prejudices.  Reading one that puts forwards views diametrically opposed to your own makes you think.

[spawnjohnuk]

how do you know that dm readers dont read it for being opposite to their views and its reinforcing the opposite prejudice they never had ...as is the case of peeps who slant dm readers because they read it ?

I think jasper carrot started the joke if you read the sun newspaper your stupid.

I only have one problem with the whole set up and that's why dont the tabloids with strong opinions do something about it ? they have enough money to take on the petty government .(I don't or I would)..so in my opinion they should shut up or put up .

[bookhunter2007]

---

@*.*..lola..*.* wrote:

It's only a newspaper people....get over yourselves!

---

Try telling that to Lucy Meadows... http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/05/28/uk-teacher-lucy-meadows-was-hounded-by-a-transphobic-press-says...

[bookhunter2007]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

I regularly read the Daily Mail. What is the point in reading a 'newspaper' that corresponds with your own political and/or moral standpoint? - all that does is reinforce your own prejudices.

---

It's confirmation bias., and I tend to agree. Although tbh i'm wouldn't exactly say the Mail's outlook on 'Welfare' is a view that is  "diametrically opposed to your own". 😉

[merehazle]

---

@*.*..lola..*.* wrote:

Not that I have to justify myself to anyone, but I read most news stories via Facebook where I'm subscribed to ALL the national daily papers.

If a story really grabs my interest, I tend to read each newspaper's take on it.....including the Daily Mails  ......otherwise I just read whichever one pops up first on my news feed.

What really makes me laugh is the hostility and downright condescension these Daily Mail haters openly display towards other RT posters - what the heck is that all about for goodness sake??

It's only a newspaper people....get over yourselves!

PS #21 Well said, Charlie  

---

  

Mr bookhunter at #27 she wrote more than that.

And i'm sure she would not mind a FULL quote on what she said  

She even said: ''Not that I have to justify myself to anyone''.  

Yes well said Lola, Charlie, and Ron.          

[spawnjohnuk]

I think books was pointing out that in some cases just a newspaper can have a devastating effect mere,not trying to quote lola out of context, and I agree with books and wish they would report nothing of bias

[spawnjohnuk]

in fact taking it to utopia,I wish they would take the government with them on a one way trip to mars 🙂

Apologies to martians in advance

[spawnjohnuk]

ps,after they cap extortionate loan companies of course so beer drinking cig smoking ,large tv watching ,prison dwelling members of the public can get on with enjoying the time they spend drifting round and round in the middle of nowhere pointlessly

[bookhunter2007]

---

@spawnjohnuk wrote:

I think books was pointing out that in some cases just a newspaper can have a devastating effect mere,not trying to quote lola out of context, and I agree with books and wish they would report nothing of bias

---

Aye,  All tabloids are pretty bad, but I think The Mail takes the Gold. Not only for the most fibs:

http://www.pcc.org.uk/case/resolved.html

...But also the Rothermeres' flirtations with Fascism, and its general ability to convice a sizeable chuck of it's readership of this sadistic and paranoid alternative reality where

a) the majority of immigrants are "benefit scroungers":

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-migrants-benefits/16528

b) Christmas has been renamed "Winterval" in order "not to offend ethnic minorties".

http://www.butireaditinthepaper.co.uk/2011/09/27/melanie-phillips-on-winterval/

and c) Welfare claiments are not really poor because because all of their money is spent on on flat screen tvs, blah blah

http://fullfact.org/factchecks/is_public_money_supporting_crackheads_illegal_immigrants_and_scrounge...

These oft-implied cliches are simply not true.

The Sun does this too but, it does have a kind of self-admission it is tacky as hell, whereas the Mail tries to dress itself up in a veneer of middle-class respectability despite its feet firmly placed in the same pool of toxic effluent.

If someone used the Mail as their sole source of info then I doubt they'd even heard of the word "Leveson", let alone fathom out why some might take issue with the Mail as a "news" source.

[*.*..lola..*.*]

---

@bookhunter2007 wrote:

---

@*.*..lola..*.* wrote:

It's only a newspaper people....get over yourselves!

---

Try telling that to Lucy Meadows... http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/05/28/uk-teacher-lucy-meadows-was-hounded-by-a-transphobic-press-says...

---

Tad condescending posting that link to me?

Do you seriously think that I am not already aware of how guilty the press can be of hounding people and ruining their lives (BTW that would be "THE PRESS" in general as opposed to just "THE DAILY MAIL")??

Also..once again you are completely missing the point.

The issue here is not about the Daily Mail per se, it's about the fact that EVERYONE on this board should have the right to post threads on whatever topic they choose, using links from whichever source they choose without being sneered at, judged or insulted.

Putting forward a reasoned, logical argument against the subject matter of a thread is one thing but trying to dictate to other posters which newspapers they should or shouldn't read in a bullying and hostile manner is a form of oppression and brainwashing in itself is it not?

[bookhunter2007]

---

@*.*..lola..*.* wrote:

---

@bookhunter2007 wrote:

---

@*.*..lola..*.* wrote:

It's only a newspaper people....get over yourselves!

---

Try telling that to Lucy Meadows... http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/05/28/uk-teacher-lucy-meadows-was-hounded-by-a-transphobic-press-says...

---

Tad condescending posting that link to me?

Do you seriously think that I am not already aware of how guilty the press can be of hounding people and ruining their lives (BTW that would be "THE PRESS" in general as opposed to just "THE DAILY MAIL")??

Also..once again you are completely missing the point.

The issue here is not about the Daily Mail per se, it's about the fact that EVERYONE on this board should have the right to post threads on whatever topic they choose, using links from whichever source they choose without being sneered at, judged or insulted.

Putting forward a reasoned, logical argument against the subject matter of a thread is one thing but trying to dictate to other posters which newspapers they should or shouldn't read in a bullying and hostile manner is a form of oppression and brainwashing in itself is it not?

---

Oh please. Save me the flimsy persecution complex....Funny how the very same folks who are quite happy to muckspread Mail articles which "sneer" at various minority groups start playing the victim the moment anyone challenges it.. I guess that's part and parcel of this rather warped and contradictory paradigm Dacre drips out.

Questioning, challenging or ridiculing the oft-quoted Daily Mail on a forum of a shopping site is is not "bullying".  Nor am I aware of any hate crimes against people because they read the Daily Mail - I can't say the same about the various groups the Mail likes to "bully" though?

http://www.update.org.uk/news-detail.php?page=193

[lost.parrot]

I am unaware of any facts as such behind Ronald's histrionics and conspiracy theory, and as he offers nothing to support it, I can only assume it's like many more that preceded this one

Do people comment about the DM?..certainly, it's linked so often, why would they not? That's debate as Ronald might say

As to what can or can't be posted that's dictated by the boards own rules, so no, one can't post anything, and it rather reminds me of one of Ronald's many flounces under the last CM, declaring he, 'was not going to be dictated to, as we live in a democacy ' Well arguably we may, but we don't post on one. I believe he assumed a degree of naivety, which after many years in the position of CM, simply wasn't so.

Whether you should post something which invites instant moral judgements on tragic cases on what often turns out to be inaccurate reporting, usually to spice a story for its readers ( most tabloids ),  is a matter of judgement. Personally I dont see what satisfaction some seem to derive from this, but clearly some do, and it's why the tabs report it in the way they do, and others instantly put on their moral wig and gown and start clutching their pearls

I don't see much of a point in debating an old story served up as a new one when the original, factually inaccurate in certain material matters, has been revised by subsequent reports which have effectively superseded the original

But as one features editor said, the GBP...that's great british public, taken as a whole are like children. You have to fit the story to their needs'

If others get tearful over some d-grade drunken celeb, who is named  and then imply this is somehow the fault of the legal system, it's not, it's the very same papers which they happily read, link, and salivate over. The tabloids name and publish, often using a variety of methods to tease out a name. Their defence is their readers want to know. If you read the same papers then either it doesn't really bother you, or not enough to stop reading/buying, and whilst I think the papers bear responsibility, so to an extent do its readers.
The same defence incidentally used to justify the access to milly dowlers mobile

Arguably there has seldom been a time of more fierce competition amongst print media, who are not only in competition with their rivals, but sometimes with their own online versions. It's difficult to see how some titles will survive in the long term. The DM incidentally is probably better placed than most

I would go along to a certain extent with looking at different sources, but if you are looking for news, as in newspaper, then I can't say the DM, and certain others meet that need. I would agree with confirmation of prejudice, pretty much the history of certain boards in a way, but lol at diametrically opposed opinions,....shurely some mistake

[joe_bloggs*]

Decent article from Russel Brand in the Guardian about certain tabloids:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/29/russell-brand-rages-sun-rupert-murdoch

"These organisations want us dumb and full of junk, in our bellies and our brains.............."More importantly these corporations, whether they're selling information or consumer goods, collude in a pervasive myth and toil to keep us uninformed on important matters such as the environment, economic inequality, and distracted by vapid celebrity claptrap. The Sun don't want an informed populace rejecting their bigoted dogma and daily objectification of women. Tescos don't want engaged and educated consumers recognising the damage that their corporate marauding does to communities, agriculture and local businesses. Their agenda is the same."

[spawnjohnuk]

the agenda is the same he's right.

He has however the money to stand as a candidate ,why isn't he ? (or is he ?)

It's all well and good pointing out the wrong,but not in paper articles unless he intends to do something about it (or at least try) if not then its same as the rest...jackanory.

[ronnybabes]

---

@lost.parrot wrote:

I am unaware of any facts as such behind Ronald's histrionics and conspiracy theory, and as he offers nothing to support it, I can only assume it's like many more that preceded this one

Well! that's me told then. 

[tommy.irene]

Baltic Britain: Arctic gusts due this week will make parts of the country feel like it's -9C in the wind

• A cold sweep will descend on Britain on Thursday with lows of -2C
• The Met Office claims it will feel as low as -9C in the north of England
• Snow falling in north east expected to settle to form 10-15cm beds

Snow will descend on Britain this week as the country faces a sweep of freezing temperatures.

Temperatures will feel as low as -9C on Friday as a cold sweep moves in from the north, the Met Office revealed.

The freeze is beginning to creep in but will reach its height on Thursday when snow will fall across Scotland and in the north.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2516420/UK-weather-Arctic-gusts-week-make-country-feel-like-...