Daily Mail

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 5 << First < 1 2 3 4 5

Bert the Head Epsom 10 Feb 17 11.57pm
Originally posted by Penge Eagle 16 Fake News Stories Reporters Have Run Since Trump Won [Link] No Daily Mail on this particular list, but BBC and Guardian feature... Edited by Penge Eagle (09 Feb 2017 10.11pm) You need to look at who publish the list. Please at least make a tiny effort to question what you read before you chuck it into this public domain FFS.
Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head

Epsom 10 Feb 17 11.57pm

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

16 Fake News Stories Reporters Have Run Since Trump Won [Link]

No Daily Mail on this particular list, but BBC and Guardian feature...

Edited by Penge Eagle (09 Feb 2017 10.11pm)

You need to look at who publish the list. Please at least make a tiny effort to question what you read before you chuck it into this public domain FFS.

Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head Epsom 11 Feb 17 12.22am
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted It doesn't matter what Wiki claims or doesn't claim neither would be correct because it is a standing joke in itself as PTJ demonstrated earlier. That was the Irony and the only point I was making. The trouble is, no matter how bad you think the Mail is, ALL other news publications or Media have their flaws and are unreliable. For a start I would not trust the BBC to be impartial or relied upon for the truth. Well if I want to look up an event I didn't know any thing about I would go to Wikipedia and know I need to use the sources to look deeper. But I would never ever go to the Daily Mail for anything - the sports scores I can find elsewhere. As for the BBC. The Drama is good but the news is Tory bollocks so I agree that its bull. But as for the Daily Mail. I honestly believe, I mean I really really really believe. An independently thinking person would not go there. If I could I would dress that total cnut Quentin Letts in a Brighton Shirt and throw him to the bottom left hand corner of the Homesdale and just watch. I am a peace loving liberal but I would love to watch the cnut struggle to survive like a poor receipient of the Daily mail's advocated policies. Edited by Bert the Head (11 Feb 2017 12.23am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head

Epsom 11 Feb 17 12.22am

Originally posted by Hoof Hearted

It doesn't matter what Wiki claims or doesn't claim neither would be correct because it is a standing joke in itself as PTJ demonstrated earlier.

That was the Irony and the only point I was making.

The trouble is, no matter how bad you think the Mail is, ALL other news publications or Media have their flaws and are unreliable.

For a start I would not trust the BBC to be impartial or relied upon for the truth.

Well if I want to look up an event I didn't know any thing about I would go to Wikipedia and know I need to use the sources to look deeper. But I would never ever go to the Daily Mail for anything - the sports scores I can find elsewhere.

As for the BBC. The Drama is good but the news is Tory bollocks so I agree that its bull.

But as for the Daily Mail. I honestly believe, I mean I really really really believe. An independently thinking person would not go there.

If I could I would dress that total cnut Quentin Letts in a Brighton Shirt and throw him to the bottom left hand corner of the Homesdale and just watch. I am a peace loving liberal but I would love to watch the cnut struggle to survive like a poor receipient of the Daily mail's advocated policies.

Edited by Bert the Head (11 Feb 2017 12.23am)

Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head Epsom 11 Feb 17 12.35am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger How is it scaremongering to be honest about it? If I told you not to put you head in the oven, would that be scaremongering? No. But it would be bad information.
Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head

Epsom 11 Feb 17 12.35am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

How is it scaremongering to be honest about it?

If I told you not to put you head in the oven, would that be scaremongering?

No. But it would be bad information.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 11 Feb 17 11.07am
Originally posted by Username Comrade? If the BBC is so left wing why are Andrew Neil and Laura Kuenssberg such senior Political reporters? Why do they spend so much time discussing the problems/issues of the Labour party including (but not limited to) in recent years extensive coverage of the 'anti-semitism' scandal, or the huge questions over Corbyn's leadership. I don't seem to remember as much coverage given to Boris Johnson's racist comments? Why have they spent 10 years giving Nigel Farage/UKIP so much coverage? Before the last General Election they were given a huge platform compared to the Green Party (who at that stage actually had an MP, UKIP didn't). If they are so left wing why don't they push/promote the Green Party more? Maybe, just maybe, they are actually fairly well balanced which is why people from both the left and the right claim it's biased. Still, you go on trusting the paper that used a picture of Winston Churchill's statue (you know, the Churchill who called for a United States of Europe) to signify lift off for Brexit. Who branded independent judges executing their job as 'enemies' of the people while conveniently burying the story about the Jo Cox murder trial. Who made up stories about Romanian's and Bulgarians booking flights to move here when they joined the EU. I'm not advocating reading or believing any newspaper... I have never ever bought the Daily Mail and only read articles when they are posted on here. I only buy the Sun on Saturday to get the TV magazine and the footy/racing pullout... I am amused by Clarkson's column but the rest of the paper is toilet material which no one could/should believe if they had a modicum of intelligence. What I am saying is that for a start.... it's a fcuking joke that Wikipedia can criticise anybody or anything when it is a joke website bereft of any credibility! Secondly I wouldn't trust ANY newspaper of any political persuasion or even those that purport to be Independent because none of them are... neither the paper nor the journalist. Finally, in my experience the BBC is inherently left leaning... yes some odd few journo's from the right get prominence occasionally, but the overall BBC stance is firmly to the left/liberal. You are a fool if you trust any news outlet implicitly.... and an even bigger fool if you believe the bollocks put out by a Union!
Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 11 Feb 17 11.07am

Originally posted by Username

Comrade?

If the BBC is so left wing why are Andrew Neil and Laura Kuenssberg such senior Political reporters?

Why do they spend so much time discussing the problems/issues of the Labour party including (but not limited to) in recent years extensive coverage of the 'anti-semitism' scandal, or the huge questions over Corbyn's leadership. I don't seem to remember as much coverage given to Boris Johnson's racist comments?

Why have they spent 10 years giving Nigel Farage/UKIP so much coverage? Before the last General Election they were given a huge platform compared to the Green Party (who at that stage actually had an MP, UKIP didn't). If they are so left wing why don't they push/promote the Green Party more?

Maybe, just maybe, they are actually fairly well balanced which is why people from both the left and the right claim it's biased.

Still, you go on trusting the paper that used a picture of Winston Churchill's statue (you know, the Churchill who called for a United States of Europe) to signify lift off for Brexit. Who branded independent judges executing their job as 'enemies' of the people while conveniently burying the story about the Jo Cox murder trial. Who made up stories about Romanian's and Bulgarians booking flights to move here when they joined the EU.

I'm not advocating reading or believing any newspaper... I have never ever bought the Daily Mail and only read articles when they are posted on here.

I only buy the Sun on Saturday to get the TV magazine and the footy/racing pullout... I am amused by Clarkson's column but the rest of the paper is toilet material which no one could/should believe if they had a modicum of intelligence.

What I am saying is that for a start.... it's a fcuking joke that Wikipedia can criticise anybody or anything when it is a joke website bereft of any credibility!

Secondly I wouldn't trust ANY newspaper of any political persuasion or even those that purport to be Independent because none of them are... neither the paper nor the journalist.

Finally, in my experience the BBC is inherently left leaning... yes some odd few journo's from the right get prominence occasionally, but the overall BBC stance is firmly to the left/liberal.

You are a fool if you trust any news outlet implicitly.... and an even bigger fool if you believe the bollocks put out by a Union!

Alert a moderator to this post

Willo Online South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Feb 17 11.27am
Originally posted by Bert the Head Well if I want to look up an event I didn't know any thing about I would go to Wikipedia and know I need to use the sources to look deeper. But I would never ever go to the Daily Mail for anything - the sports scores I can find elsewhere. As for the BBC. The Drama is good but the news is Tory bollocks so I agree that its bull. But as for the Daily Mail. I honestly believe, I mean I really really really believe. An independently thinking person would not go there. If I could I would dress that total cnut Quentin Letts in a Brighton Shirt and throw him to the bottom left hand corner of the Homesdale and just watch. I am a peace loving liberal but I would love to watch the cnut struggle to survive like a poor receipient of the Daily mail's advocated policies. Edited by Bert the Head (11 Feb 2017 12.23am) Well our views are polarised. I think his column is absolutely brilliant - never fail to read it.Love his style of writing and the analogies.
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo Online

South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Feb 17 11.27am

Originally posted by Bert the Head

As for the BBC. The Drama is good but the news is Tory bollocks so I agree that its bull.

But as for the Daily Mail. I honestly believe, I mean I really really really believe. An independently thinking person would not go there.

If I could I would dress that total cnut Quentin Letts in a Brighton Shirt and throw him to the bottom left hand corner of the Homesdale and just watch. I am a peace loving liberal but I would love to watch the cnut struggle to survive like a poor receipient of the Daily mail's advocated policies.

Edited by Bert the Head (11 Feb 2017 12.23am)

Well our views are polarised. I think his column is absolutely brilliant - never fail to read it.Love his style of writing and the analogies.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 11 Feb 17 11.34am
Originally posted by Bert the Head No. But it would be bad information. Point being that warning against a bad course of action is not scaremongering. It's wise.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

11 Feb 17 11.34am

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by Bert the Head

No. But it would be bad information.

Point being that warning against a bad course of action is not scaremongering. It's wise.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 5 << First < 1 2 3 4 5

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Daily Mail

Site Map

Sponsors