Silver-level article

Daily Mail

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
The Daily Mail in 1938. Today it has the same message against asylum seekers.
You gotta spin it to win it
Icon media.svg
Stop the presses!
We want pictures
of Spider-Man!
Extra! Extra!
The Daily Mail leads with the headline "Everything Is Fine: Fear It, Fear It."
That Mitchell And Webb Look

The Daily Mail (a.k.a. Hate Mail, Daily Fail, Daily Heil, Daily Moan, Crazy Mail, and so on) is a reactionary right-wing tabloid rag masquerading as a "traditional values" middle-class newspaper that is, in many ways, the second-worst of the British gutter press (only Rupert Murdoch's The Sun is worse). The Mail has been so consistently bad that Orwell called them out in Homage to Catalonia for supporting Franco. The Mail has also infamously supported Oswald Mosley and fascism.

The Daily Mail is to the UK what the New York Post is to the United States, and what the Drudge Report is to the Internet: to wit, gossipy tabloid "journalism" for those who cannot digest serious news, with a flippantly wingnut editorial stance. Like the Daily Express, it tries to appear more upmarket and respectable than the red-top British tabloids, though it does sometimes go in for the full front-page picture or headline characteristic of the populist rags. It is also notorious for its frequent harassment of individuals, campaigns of hate directed at various minorities (focusing on Muslims), and willfully deceiving and lying to its readers.

Much of its content is designed to trigger readers' limbic systems, so articles generate strong emotions of hate, fear, anger, sadness, disgust, and occasionally happiness (usually because a white middle-class person has done something nice, or kittens). Like trout in a fish farm pond, readers wait for the Daily Mail to fling the next story to them about ne'er-do-wells smirking, scruffy women in tracksuits smoking outside court (where they face charges of drunken assault or benefit fraud), brown people and assorted foreigners doing the things that they do, lefties campaigning about something, or working class people enjoying themselves in a non-approved way. Then the readership erupts into a foaming fury that quickly subsides as they wait for the next story. But the fury doesn't completely subside; it leaves a residual anger that simmers in the background and requires another trigger story to allow it to boil over once more.

Historical achievements[edit]

The Daily Mail was founded in 1896 by Lord Northcliffe (then plain Alfred Harmsworth), who amassed a newspaper empire which also included The Daily Mirror, The Times, the Sunday Times, The Observer, Sunday Dispatch, and The Evening News; his brother Harold Harmsworth (later Lord Rothermere) gained a controlling interest in 1922 after his death. The paper's fact-checking ability was first made apparent on 16 April 1912, when it ran the headline "Titanic Sunk. No Lives Lost. Collision with an Iceberg. Largest Ship in the World. 2,358 Lives in Peril. Rush of Liners to the Rescue. All Passengers Taken Off."[1] Compare this to the New York Herald April 15, 1912 headline, "The Titanic Sinks with 1,800 on Board; Only 675, Mostly Woman and Children, Saved"

It was under the proprietorship of Lord Rothermere that, in 1924, it achieved some notoriety by publishing the Zinoviev letter, a forged document which indicated that British Communists were planning violent revolution. This had a significant influence on the outcome of the general election four days later which resulted in defeat for the Labour Party. This is why some people refer to the rag as the Forgers' Gazette.[2]

During the 1930s, the Daily Mail was sympathetic to German and Italian fascism, as Rothermere was friendly with both Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. An article by Rothermere printed in the paper also praised the British Union of Fascists leader Oswald Mosley for "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine."[3][4] As well as devoting a lot of time to diplomacy with fascists, Lord Rothermere was also occupied in a failed scheme to become King of Hungary, so his son Esmond took an increasing role at the papers in the 1930s.[5]

In turn, the 3rd Viscount Vere Harmsworth took over in 1970. Despite the paper's moralising about other people's private lives, Vere was a keen womanizer and socialite, and enjoyed an open marriage to actress Beverly Brooks, known as "Bubbles" Rothermere, until her death in 1992.[6] In 1998, when his new Korean wife proved too much for him, the late Vere was replaced by his son Jonathan, the present owner and 4th Viscount Rothermere. Despite professed patriotism, the 3rd Viscount had become a tax exile in France, and his son continues to claim "non-dom" tax status as an honorary Frenchperson.[7]

In 2014, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, which also owns trashy tabloids, accused the Australian online edition of the Daily Mail of plagiarism.[8]

In November 2018 ABC Australia's Media Watch programme devoted an entire broadcast to the Daily Mail Online's mass plagiarism of other journalists' work and its effect on revenue and the ongoing viability of other newspapers. [9]


Racist in public, so you don't have to be.
—Russell Howard, Mock the Week
A real Daily Mail front page. Did you know that blacks have 18 more kids than middle-class white people and also Kate Moss has even more shoes?

The Mail is usually considered the furthest-right of all British newspapers and tabloids, competing for this spot with the Daily Express. Although some of the red-top tabloids might throw about more extreme rhetoric, their laddish attitude often means they're not taken too seriously. The Mail, however, is entirely Serious Business. Their primary editorial stances are:

  • Anti-immigration
  • Anti-welfare and poor people in general
  • Health sensationalism (particularly with respect to cancer)
  • Anti–government
  • Anti-LGBT
  • Anti-Europe
  • Anti-human rights because human rights only protect the obviously guilty and/or paedophiles or darkies.
  • Anti-politics because the Mail's views are not politics, but just common sense.
  • Anti-internet and other modern technology ('Facebook kills our children')
  • Anti-taxes (mainly for those who can afford to pay them)
  • Anti-cyclist
  • Anti-intellectualism ('what do they know?') including academics [10], experts (including doctors); indeed anyone with an "-ology." AN Wilson famously stated that "The trouble with a 'scientific' argument, of course, is that it is not made in the real world, but in a laboratory by an unimaginative academic relying solely on empirical facts".
  • Anti-lawyers, especially those who defend the enemies of the Daily Mail State.
  • Anti-liberal (not realising that the opposite of liberalism — (with a small 'l') is not Conservatism but totalitarianism/fascism)
  • Pro-objectification of women
  • Declinism about UK life, the economy, etc.
  • Pro-complaining about anything and everything they don't like
  • Claiming that political changes were because of their campaigns

To give the impression that it has greater influence than it does the Daily Mail runs headlines along the lines of "Government does XYZ after Mail campaign". This might refer to child safety laws, beach clean up legislation or in 2018 the banning of plastic straws. These are issues that are already under consideration, but which the Daily Mail attaches itself to once it realises that it is a popular movement, and to appear that it is part of that movement. The use of the word "after" is intended to suggest "because of" to uncritical readers, when it merely means "after, and not influenced in any way by".

A traditionally conservative tabloid (by UK standards), the Mail blamed the European Union and European immigration to Britain for the economic crisis. It likes to incite its readers against minorities with sensationalist headlines about the benefits immigrants receive and the threat they pose to British culture and security (almost always entirely founded on lies). It frequently reports that the country is "going to the dogs" and we're all going to die, while at the same time wondering why people are voting for the British National Party. Some British people find this amusing, as the Mail's editorial stances are indistinguishable from BNP policies. It is exceptionally rare for the main headline to be unlinked to asylum seekers or "dangerous" foreigners in some way or another, regardless of the context of the story. Such is the case with Mahira Rustam Al-Azawi, who would otherwise just be another case of long-term fraud if it wasn't for the Mail slanting it toward her being an Iraqi asylum seeker.[11][12]

While the Mail does prefer to blame it all on Johnny Foreigner, other popular editorial villains include gypsies, the workshy, Young People Today, the public sector, the BBC[13] (which, in full Fox News style, it says has a strong liberal bias),[14] and anyone to the left of Norman Tebbit. For much of the late 2000s, the Mail had a major obsession with house prices and how they change, in either direction. Recent drops in UK house prices have sparked massive rage and panic across Mail headlines and front pages, despite being a mere fraction the size of the insane increases that occurred over the preceding decade. The Daily Mail headline generator pokes fun at these obsessions, with many randomly generated headlines asking whether immigrants are lowering house prices.[15] For the last few years, the Mail has also been the leading voice in demonising anyone who claims social benefits for any reason whatsoever (while completely oblivious to the fact that the State Pension received by about 15m people is a social benefit), which has been shown to fuel stigma of the majority of genuine claimants, and discourage people who may need help from seeking it.[16] "Single mothers", for decades one of Daily Mail's many targets for reader hate, are always irresponsible, lazy and "loose", unless they are middle-class, in which case widowhood or being abandoned by a husband for his secretary at the bank where he works are allowable as an excuse (complete with sad face photos and many sympathetic column inches).

People who are obviously not of the right social standing are condemned for any attempts to enjoy themselves, regular articles being run whenever plebs gather to have fun. The Grand National horse race, held near Liverpool, is a favourite, as it attracts people of clearly Liverpudlian origin and therefore worthy of scorn. In keeping with the Mail's misogyny, photos focus on women appearing to be drunk, wearing skimpy clothes, displaying tattoos and being overweight. And in keeping with the Mail's voyeuristic love of upskirting, they focus on women's underwear [17]. Newcastle's Bigg Market is another reliable source of pap photos of young women enjoying themselves in unacceptable clothes. These inferior beings are deserving of harsh judgment, as the act of consuming alcohol and letting your hair down on a night out has no quantifiable moral value. [18] Not to be confused with the harmless fun when Daily Mail staff held a debauched Christmas party in a Soho sex club, as reported in Private Eye magazine but oddly not reported in the Daily Mail.

Daily Mail readers support British people experiencing homelessness only when presented with articles on foreign poor people. "Why are we sending aid money to help those foreigners when we have our own homeless here?" they ask. But when the article is about British homelessness they rage about how these people are lazy and should get a job and have a wash, and that they have no sympathy for them. In December 2018 one online reader, after careful thought, commented that eugenics was the solution to British poverty.[citation needed]

A once popular topic was how adolescent female singers or actors were "all grown up", illustrated with several photos of said girl in a figure-hugging dress at an event, taken by the pap from several angles to ensure that ex-pat readers in Thailand were satisfied that, yes, she was.[19][20][21][22] Despite apparently having dropped the headline for being just too creepy, it made a return in March 2019 with a photo of a 16 year old child actor in a bikini. [23]

The weather is a frequent topic, with the hottest temperatures in Britain compared with whichever foreign holiday destination is slightly cooler that day, to emphasise just how hot things are. This does sometimes lead to embarrassment, when a British summer temperature is compared with Rio die Janeiro, as reporters fail to recognise that Rio is in the southern hemisphere winter. This astonishing ignorance was best revealed in 2013, when Britain, Northern Europe and North America experienced heavy snowfalls. The Daily Mail shrieked "As the World Freezes, Whatever Happened To Global Warming?" apparently without knowing that Australia was experiencing searing temperatures and severe drought in its southern hemisphere summer.

Warm weather is also reported in Fahrenheit, as it gives nice big numbers [24]. As soon as temperatures rise above a "scorching" 70F the photographers head for Brighton beach to photograph as many young women in bikinis as they can. The long lens photos include intrusive shots of sunbathing women, to help readers understand the meteorological conditions. Conversely, cold weather is reported in Celsius, and the coldest spot in the Scottish mountains is used to declare that "Britain Freezes in -12 Blizzards", to the puzzlement of readers in the south of England, where it is lightly drizzling and rather mild.

The word "flaunt" is used a lot in Daily Mail headlines, such as "[female celebrity] FLAUNTS her bikini body", this brazen flaunting being done on a private beach or yacht hundreds of metres from the hidden pap and his long lens.

Suicide has long been a popular topic in the Mail, because it fulfills a number of requirements for Mail content: it triggers readers' limbic systems, it provides sometimes gory or shocking images, it plays on readers' sense of the fragility of life (after all the articles on murder, accidental death by various means, fatal diseases, dangers to children etc) and it offers the opportunity for sour moral judgement. The media have long had reporting standards on suicide, requiring the showing of sensitivity and being careful not to provide details other than the bare minimum necessary. Not the Daily Mail though. Over and over again, despite repeated censure from standards groups, the Mail goes into sometimes graphic detail and happily describes the method for the benefit of any vulnerable people reading [25] [26] [27]

Every winter without fail, young interns discover social media photos of sun halos, and because they have never seen such things before they enthusiastically write an article about this "RARE" phenomenon, despite them not being rare at all [28] [29] [30] [31].

Despite believing itself to be the last bastion of English values, the Daily Mail often displays a very poor grasp of both the language and geography of England. Maps hurriedly created to illustrate a story often have cities comically marked in the wrong place, often out by hundreds of miles. In 2016 a story about the causeway to Holy Island in the North Sea described it as crossing "the River Tyne", a mere 60 miles out and the wrong type of water.[32] The almost daily articles about road rage or fatal traffic accidents very often feature sentences such as "he applied his breaks", "despite jamming on his breaks", and "he was seen to be breaking hard"; and in one case used "broke" as the past tense of brake [33].

The Daily Mail has long supported education, particularly blonde teenage girls who have just passed their A-levels, and who celebrate by jumping in the air.

Prisons, as seen through the Daily Mail prism, are luxurious accommodation options for the undeserving, akin to a "5 star hotel" and which provide to every inmate "X-Boxes", flat screen TVs, a la carte menus, and other taxpayer-funded facilities, "because prisoners have more rights than ordinary Brits". However, whenever an "ordinary Brit" is banged up for nothing more than defending his way of life by throwing a pig head at a mosque, or breaching the conditions of a suspended sentence, prisons become "dangerous hell holes". Irrespective of the length of sentence given to criminals (real ones, not white middle-class people who have been treated unfairly) Daily Mail readers calculate what they believe the actual time spent behind bars will be by halving it, subtracting 5, carrying the 3, and ending up with "7 months", even for mass murder. Worse still, if the offender has more than a minimal level of skin pigment, they believe that he will be showered with compensation and given a house upon release.

Coverage of the 2018 Grenfell Tower disaster was, for a short time, sympathetic towards the victims, as was reader sentiment. "HOW THE HELL COULD IT HAPPEN?" asked the headline indignantly the next day, conveniently ignoring the fact that the Daily Mail has for years fought against Health and Safety as a sort of evil lefty and/or EU plot against British business. Before long, however, it was revealed that many of the occupants of the tower were not only not English, but some were dark-skinned and many were Muslim. Reader sympathy evaporated, and comments began to suggest that they were illegal immigrants, that the source of the fire was a "Muslim bomb maker", and that victims were simply after undeserved compensation (often mockingly written "com-pen-SAY-shun" in imitation of columnist Richard Littlejohn, see below). The actual cause of the tragedy - flammable cladding and a careless attitude towards the safety of people was largely ignored. The Daily Mail's coverage itself shifted to focus on the backgrounds of victims, the fact that many were provided emergency accommodation in "luxury hotels at taxpayers' expense", and of the handful of fraudulent claims from people who were not eligible. Even the identification of the likely start of the fire - a fridge in one of the flats - was met with reader scepticism, many stating that they didn't believe that fridges could catch fire and that it was probably the Ethiopian-born occupant of the flat "cooking up explosives". The Daily Mail itself could obviously not print such egregious lies (other than providing a public platform for them), so they printed others, leading to sufficient fear for the safety of the man that he was provided police protection. [34]

There are only two forms of art acceptable to the Daily Mail and its readers; nude women body-painted to look like tigers, or ultra-realist drawings that look like photos. Anything else is "modern rubbish" that "a 5 year old could do".

Famously the Mail Online employs a Pixellator to obscure female nipples in almost any image, whether photograph or painting, sculpture, or on one occasion even a child's pavement chalk drawing. This creepy puritanism is matched by the equally creepy prurience that compels them to publish many images of nudity, particularly long-lens pap shots of topless women, voyeuristic shots of momentary underwear exposure, breasts accidentally exposed, and nipples seen through sheer clothes. What this disturbing combination of sexual repression and obsessive voyeurism is called is not yet known.

Animal stories are a mainstay of Daily Mail content, although in keeping with the overall policy of only running stories that trigger emotional responses, they either feature cloyingly cute baby animals (often with nausea-inducing captions saying things like "Hey! Wait for me, Mum!"), or gruesome fights to the death between lions, centipedes, snakes or spiders.

Although these days the Daily Mail is rabidly eurosceptic, this was not always its editorial stance. In fact, during the 1930s, the paper was a big fan of a united European superstate. However, due to a deterioration in Britain's relationship with the Mail's favourite European statesman, the paper was obliged to reverse its stance on the issue rather suddenly in late 1939.

The Mail also occasionally expresses anti-American views. The aforementioned favourite European statesman once called the US a "mongrel nation", and the Mail has rarely disagreed with this sentiment. One notable example occurred on 5 September 1956, in a commentary on the film The Blackboard Jungle, the first with a rock-and-roll soundtrack. And what did the Mail's editorial writer think of the movie and of rock-and-roll?[35]

It is deplorable. It is tribal. And it is from America. It follows ragtime, blues, jazz, hot cha-cha and the boogie-woogie, which surely originated in the jungle. We sometimes wonder whether this is the negro's revenge.

No doubt they would have preferred Pat Boone if he wasn't one of those nasty colonials, too.

The online version of the Daily Mail, or "DM" as used by contributors to the comments section, carries two different disclaimers to their comments section that ultimately result in the same thing.

The comments below have been moderated in advance" means that almost everything against their corporate point of view will not appear as a viewpoint. That is, unless you are one of the lucky ones to provide a visible contrary point of view, and be subject to a rash of 'red arrows', which are the Daily Mail's way of subjecting you to their own court of opinion that supports theirs.
The comments below have not been moderated" means that they have been moderated in advance and that the Daily Mail lies. Comment on an alleged un-moderated article and more often than not, if your comment does not fit general opinion or is not following their own guidelines, it is not going to show up. This is where they use "moderated in advance" to mean that whatever you see has not been tweaked by their army of editing public opinion.

There is also "option 3", which is where they have a story that they wanted to control opinion one way, but the comments dictate otherwise. That usually means they place "The comments below have not been moderated" on the comments section, and allow it to be a place where most comments are published.

Irrespective of the level of moderation, reader comments are an endless source of amusement as a place where misanthropes, misogynists, racists and conspiracy theorists gather to spout their nonsense, presumably because every single person in their lives is utterly fed up with hearing their angry and sour views [36] [37]. Starting a statement with "No doubt..." means that something that hasn't happened (and will never happen in the real world) will definitely happen in their seething imagination: "No doubt there will be minarets on Westminster Abbey within 5 years". "No doubt it will soon be illegal to wish someone Happy Christmas". "No doubt anyone who defends themselves against burglars will be jailed for life before long". And so on.[38]

The British Royal Family has long been a mainstay of Daily Mail coverage, in the the beginning because its readers were loyal traditionalists who adored the royals. More recently, however, there has been an increasingly hostile reader response, reaching a crescendo when Meghan Markle married Prince Harry and became the Duchess of Sussex, while having darker skin than they liked. Daily Mail provided its readers with lots of stories about her, generously illustrated with pictures for them to become angry about. Creased skirts, toes the wrong length, not wearing tights, smiling too much, wrong colour nail polish; the list of things that readers hated about her was long. [39] [40] [41] [42]

Before this, readers were hostile to Catherine "Kate" Middleton when she married Prince William, ranting that she was a social climber and from an over-ambitious middle class family. They mocked her eagerness to snare William at St Andrews University, and derided her ex-air hostess and party supply company manager mother's apparent pushiness in marrying one of her daughters into the Royal Family. But since Ms Markle married Prince Harry Kate Middleton has been transformed in readers' eyes into a ideal young female royal; elegant, classy, poised, and white.

During Ms Middleton's first pregnancy readers came up with all sorts of crazy; she wasn't really pregnant; it was a cushion that was swapped for a bigger one every couple of weeks; that there was a hidden surrogate gestating on her behalf; that her radiant appearance after giving birth was proof that she had never been through labour; and best of all that her severe morning sickness was because the Royals are shape-shifting alien reptiles and Prince William's alien DNA was incompatible with her human DNA. It seems now that readers have snapped out of this absurd thinking, and have now focused on Ms Markle wearing a cushion, not being pregnant, having a secret surrogate and so on, although a significant number now believe that she was pregnant on her wedding day and plan to do quick mental arithmetic to prove it when the baby is born [43].

Stories about London invariably focus on non-white immigrants or crime, or non-white immigrants AND crime, so that many readers now believe that "London has fallen", that "there are no real British in London any more", and that "you won't see a white face in London these days", while at the same time saying that they would never visit London because they would be stabbed to death. Presumably the 8 million people who live there, and the 31 million visitors each year are just lucky. Despite believing that there are no white people left, readers are still enraged if a non-white person is included in a television cooking show, because "this is a white country and it's clearly just PC box-ticking to include them" [44].

Photographs illustrating stories have captions apparently added by staff who very often seem to be guessing. A 2018 story about a British street photographer included a photo of a cashpoint (ATM) engineer working on a machine, with the caption, "A prankster wears a costume on his head resembling a cash machine".[45] Articles about World War 2 are often illustrated with stock images of Spitfires or Hurricanes, sometimes captioned as "jets". Similarly whales have been described as "huge fish" and sharks as "enormous mammals" by dim employees clearly not under the supervision of an editor.

Increasingly, Daily Mail Online "borrows" the work of other sites to use as filler to pad out its site. The business model appears to be based on Fagin's lair from Charles Dickens' "Oliver Twist", where junior employees are instructed to steal as much as they can.[46] [47]

Many sensational stories rest solely on either faked images or a failure to understand perspective or telephoto lenses. Hence the shocking story of Prince Edward aiming a shotgun at a child was based on a long lens photo that gave a false impression to anyone unfamiliar with telephoto perspective.[48] Similarly, an article about a "terrifying" bridge was based on an inability to understand how a telephoto lens "steepens" gentle slopes.[49] Periodically the Daily Mail runs stories about "superhuman" ants apparently lifting heavy weights, with photos that a child can see are simply inverted images of ants hanging upside down.[50] Heights have long been difficult for the Daily Mail. A 50 foot cliff, over which a car has fallen, becomes a "120 foot cliff" in the Daily Mail, notwithstanding the accompanying photos showing otherwise. Bridges are given the same Daily Mail treatment.[51] One of their most egregious uses of faked imagery was to support an almost entirely false story about a "white Christian" girl in London "forced to live with a Muslim foster family". To stir up the outrage further the Mail printed a photo intended for their readers to believe was the girl and her Muslim foster carers. Instead it was a stock photo of a happy Muslim family walking in a Dubai park, carefully cropped to remove obviously non-London buildings, and with a full veil crudely added for enhanced "sinister" effect.[52] [53]

Another popular theme, to which the Daily Mail returns again and again, is children falling foul of school regulations by turning up in the wrong shoes or having the wrong haircut or skirt length. This unleashes a torrent of tutting from readers who comment that "they need to learn that rules are rules" and that "life is about rules - get used to it". Oddly, these are the same readers who believe that speed limits are optional and that speed cameras are sneaky revenue-raisers.

The Daily Mail runs regular articles portraying Muslims in a negative light [54]. The few that are not overtly negative, such as covering a Muslim fashion show (with the subtext "and this is happening in a town near you") are simply open goals for readers to work themselves into a fury over. Having said that, in keeping with the policy of including violence and gore, photos and videos of Islamic punishments, such as whipping or hand amputation, receive positive feedback from readers who otherwise reject all aspects of Islam. "We should have something like that here", they enthuse [55].

An article about Muslims in Paris claimed that there were 300,000 illegal Muslim immigrants in a suburb of only 111,000 people, and the lies went on from there [56] [57] . Andrew Malone, the "journalist" responsible for this shameful and dishonest provocation, had also written a piece on "race war" in South Africa, despite never having written about SA before. The Daily Mail was forced to issue a retraction and admission that the article was racist and inflammatory nonsense, although of course those weren't the words they used. [58]

Another example of ostensibly positive or at least neutral reporting, that is in fact a more subtle way to encourage readers to judge harshly, is an article featuring wedding photos that include a happy and smiling bride clearly accompanied by a young child. Without fail readers tut and say, "In my day it was traditional to get married first, and only then have a baby". If the bride is also wearing a white dress there are snide comments about her "hypocrisy", because a bride without a child is clearly eligible to wear white because she won't have ever had sex.

Other subtle triggers, inserted into apparently neutral articles, include giving the age of the mother and her child, so readers can do a frantic bit of mental arithmetic and realise that the mother was 15 when she got pregnant and therefore is to be seen negatively, irrespective of the matter at hand. The price of a person's house (or average price in their street or suburb) gleaned by the Daily Mail from property websites, is often added as an entirely spurious detail, so that readers can decide whether to care about them or not. See also the irrelevant adjectives "black", "white", "Muslim", "unwed", "jobless", "feminist", "student", "foreigner", "middle class", "wealthy", "lesbian" and so on. Where multiple factors collide it can be difficult for readers to decide who to hate and who to admire. A Muslim man defending a white woman from an assault by a foreigner might take some unpicking. Was the Muslim man British-born or not? Was the woman a sex worker? Was the foreigner white or not? And if white, was he French? The overall Daily Mail moral judgement often rests on a knife edge that can be tipped by a single factor.

A story about a woman who had photographed a fellow aeroplane passenger after he touched her inappropriately, and who had posted his photo online to shame him, was met with reader anger - at her actions, not his. She was described as oversensitive, mistaken, a feminazi, and so on. An almost contemporaneous story about a man who had touched a woman, and whose lawyer argued that he didn't realise that it was wrong, drew angry calls for him to be deported from Britain. The fact that the first man was a white American, and the second was Muslim Asian, may have influenced the responses.

The British Army, and particularly the SAS, is fetishised to appeal to the readers who have a bookshelf of Andy McNab books. Articles always include carefully annotated images describing all the thrilling guns and other weapons that they use. British troops can do no wrong, particularly if they face criminal charges for killing civilians or injured prisoners, as international law should not apply to Our Boys. In 2017, Daily Mail, in keeping with other tabloids, ran a story based solely on an anonymous (and possibly made up) "military source" claiming that SAS troops were permanently stationed on streets across Britain posing as homeless people huddled under cardboard in shop doorways, and fed by other SAS troops posing as passing members of the public. [59] The fact that this would be a ridiculous waste of scarce resources seemed not to occur to anybody, and gullible readers were beside themselves with joy that the instant a Muslim terrorist tried anything he would be taken out by one of these disguised tramps.

By 2018, an increasing percentage of content on the Daily Mail website appeared to be stories created around videos taken from the internet. Often these videos had no associated information on location, identity of the people, or outcomes, and so the stories rather pathetically comprised simple repetition of what you were looking at, and an admission that it was not known where the video was taken, or when it was filmed, or who the people are, or what happened to them, or indeed anything other than what is seen in the video.[60] One category of video that could have been tailor-made for Daily Mail and its agenda is the social media mobile phone video of a white racist screaming abuse at someone from a minority group. It triggers readers' limbic systems, and also allows them to carefully analyse the situation before deciding that the video doesn't show the incident starting and therefore they will reserve judgment on who was to blame. This reasoned and thoughtful policy does not however apply to videos showing non-whites being confrontational.

Despite having loudly campaigned for many years against fictional violence in movies and video games, on any given day the Daily Mail Online will feature several videos of violent death: industrial explosions, suicide bombers, police shootings, horrific crashes, falls from high places, workers crushed by equipment, murder by knife or gun, or anything else that interns have found while trawling the internet for gory content. On 22 December 2018, for instance, readers could enjoy watching a one year old girl being run over by a truck [61], a homeless man being stabbed to death [62], a man being shot dead at a wedding [63] and a man being kicked to death in a shop [64]. However it still maintains vestiges of its old puritanical attitude, criticising violence in the media, particularly the BBC. In October 2013 the Daily Mail Online ran an article criticising the BBC for an episode of the gentle comedy Doc Martin, in which a fictional character was fictionally injured by a car, while concurrently running another article about how Chinese police left the body of a driver killed in a crash exposed on the road as an example to others, complete with a photo of his corpse.[65][66]

To see these videos of actual death, readers used to have to make the choice to click on the article, read "Warning: video contains disturbing images", and then choose to click on the video. As part of the steady desensitisation process such videos often now feature on the home page and autoplay whether you like it or not. These are short excerpts of the full video, running the actual moment of death in a loop, so you can enjoy seeing dancing animations of someone being repeatedly shot in the head or blown up in a suicide bombing over and over again, simply by having the Daily Mail home page open on your screen.

A particular subset of such coverage was the output from the terror group, the so-called "Islamic State". During 2015 and 2016 in particular, the Daily Mail happily published each and every horrific video that they released of torture and murder by gun, axe, fire, explosive or any other means. While other media refused to publish, the Mail with the largest online audience of any newspaper website gave IS the greatest exposure and publicity possible.

As the nights draw in every year, Daily Mail cranks up its "war on Christmas" stories, about how lefty councils, do-gooders, interfering Muslims and other godless people are attacking the very basis of British society by banning Christmas. Not to be confused with contemporaneous articles on how shops are putting up their Christmas decorations earlier each year, filling their stores with Christmas goods and playing Christmas carols over the PA, until any Brit with a sense of decency is fed up with having Christmas rammed down their throat. If laughable inconsistency isn't enough, then outright lies are tried.[67]

For many years Daily Mail has developed periodic obsessions with specific topics, attempting during its obsessional phase to feature as many stories as possible on that topic, thus creating an entirely unrealistic impression on its gullible readers that there is a crisis in progress Topics in the 1980s included "devil dogs", "granny bashers", "video nasties" (low budget horror movies featuring zombies, fake blood and creative murders, that they believed were turning the children of Britain into unfeeling psychopaths), and black muggers (whom they called "Steamers" or "steaming gangs" and incredibly used words like "hulking black brutes" to describe). More recently readers have been terrified by stories about foxes entering middle-class homes and biting babies on the face, Japanese Knotweed affecting the value of nice people's houses, False Widow Spiders posing a threat everywhere, sinkholes suddenly appearing all over the world (even if many reports were of leaking water pipes causing holes in roads, to boost the numbers) and, since the Grenfell Tower tragedy, building fires. The sudden spike in articles on these topics represents the new obsession of the Editor and not any increase in incidence, but readers believe that something sinister is afoot. The short-lived sinkhole issue convinced many that "something" was happening, perhaps secret military weapons tests, or "signs" of the End Times. A hole that formed on a Queensland beach next to a campsite, slightly damaging one caravan, was believed by some to be a secret miniature nuclear bomb test. Similarly, any new fire story is greeted with reader comments that "we never used to get fires in London", and that they must be caused by Muslims.

As late as the 1980s the Daily Mail used overseas stories of unusual death or injury as amusing filler, until even readers began to complain. A Chinese motorcyclist being killed after crashing into a large hole in the road was reported in a comedic way, because, as readers suggested, he wasn't British. Similarly images of the dead and dying would be printed without question if the victims were foreign, and particularly if they were not European, when a greater sensitivity would be shown if the victims were British. After a terror attack in Nairobi in 2019, there was criticism of the Mail Online and others for showing the bodies of victims because they were black and not white [68]; however by 2019 the Mail Online made no such distinction and would show almost any images of dead bodies that they could obtain.

A repeated theme on the Mail Online website is photos of British towns in the past, an open goal giving readers the opportunity to comment that it looks lovely, what with the people being all white and no mosques evident in the pictures [69] [70].

In 2016 Daily Mail ran a story about an upcoming Thomas the Tank Engine movie that was going to feature trains from nations other than the fictional Island of Sodor [71]. Readers were incandescent with rage at this destruction of white, middle class English values, saying that they would never allow their children or grandchildren to watch the movie and that PC was ruining everything. The fact that the plot was Thomas taking part in an international competition between trains, which presumably would require trains from other countries, was ignored. One reader's objection went beyond the angry opinion that trains should only be racially white, adding that the idea was absurd because different countries used different track gauges.

Daily Mail likes to run stories about foreign insects or plants causing problems in Britain, although probably not because readers are interested in natural history. Without fail comments follow the same tired template: they will probably get a free house; the worst kind are the two-legged ones; will [hated pro-refugee celebrity] put them up at their house, and so on. A sub-set of the cute animal photos that Daily Mail likes to run is gorillas acting like humans; mothers cradling their babies, hilarious facial expressions etc. Comments are now usually moderated, as during the Presidency of Barack Obama readers simply couldn't help making amusing comparisons with him or his wife Michelle, or various actors, singers or politicians who by coincidence happened to be black.

In 2018 the announcement that the 13th Doctor in the TV series Doctor Who would be played by a woman, another story the Daily Mail knew would stoke up the rage in their readers, was met with predictable fury. "It's DOCTOR Who, not Nurse Who", argued one. The very fact that since its inception in 1963, 55 years earlier, it had starred 12 white male actors in a row, proved that The Doctor was a white male and any attempt to make this time-travelling, shape-shifting extra-terrestrial being from the planet Gallifrey anything other than a white male was PC gone mad. Daily Mail readers then waited with simmering anger for the first episode to be broadcast, and they were not disappointed: several of the other characters were also not white males. Each weekly Daily Mail trigger article about the previous night's episode was met with hundreds of angry racist and misogynist comments, happily published by the Daily Mail.[72][73][74]

It is unknown whether readers develop a "Daily Mail mindset" as a result of years of exposure to it, or it simply reflects what they already think. The Daily Mail mindset is characterised by anger borne of frustration, but driven by ignorance of the true complexities of an issue. Thus, every issue should have a simple solution, identified by the Daily Mail reader but missed by the "so-called experts". These include, but not limited to, hanging criminals (murderers all the way down through drug users to habitual shoplifters), building a wall around Britain to stop illegal immigration, and "the authorities" (Police? Councils?) throwing bricks through the windows of people whose children had committed acts of vandalism but were below the age of criminal responsibility and thus could not be punished. A perfect representation of the Daily Mail mindset is the cartoon strip "The Male Online", created by Barney Farmer and Lee Healey and published in Viz comic. In it, a middle-aged man rages at what he reads on the Mail Online website, or events occurring locally (like a foreign couple moving in next door), and feels compelled to rant to his long-suffering wife, Beryl. The angry shout of "BERYL!" quickly became a popular response to reading any right wing rant.

Following the successful setup of the online version of the Daily Mail, a Facebook page was created, apparently for readers frustrated that comment moderators sometimes removed the most mouthfoamingly racist comments. Please do not read Daily Mail Facebook comments if you wish to preserve any faith in human nature.

The Mail's Editor[edit]

The paper's former editor Paul Dacre emerged very rarely even during his time at the paper, which ran from 1992 to 2018. He almost never appears on television (or any other medium), and when he (rarely) writes overtly in the Mail, he is barely literate. For example, he manages to convert a (perhaps) valid point about press freedom into a personal, risible, incoherent diatribe against his enemies (The Guardian). How this secretive man claims to be an effective journalist is beyond any comprehension. Private Eye magazine refers to Dacre as "double cunting Dacre" due to his alleged habit of screaming such obscenities at staff who displease him. Dacre stepped down as Editor in 2018, still without the long-hoped-for Knighthood.

Link bait[edit]

Not even once.

Some theories have emerged that the Daily Mail merely writes the trash it does in order to provoke massive swarms of links and clicks to its website, thus milking its sponsors and advertisers for masses of cash. In response to this, the website IstyOsty was formed[75] with the intention of storing Daily Mail articles on a proxy server so that people could read them without contributing to the Mail's view count. Not massively impressed with such an Evil Scheme, the Mail threatened the site with around £150,000 worth of legal action and a cease and desist in August 2011.[76]

"Sidebar of shame"[edit]

Exclusive to the Mail Online, this "sidebar of shame", featuring on women's naughty bits, has been described as "the raucous and shameless energy of the tabloid press". However, despite this obvious pandering, this has turned out to be unprofitable for the company.[77] Observers delight in comparing DM stories about "perverts" convicted of upskirting with stories in the SoS featuring "wardrobe malfunctions" where female celebrities accidentally expose their underwear, as photographed by a paid pap lying on the ground to obtain the images. Whether or not the Daily Mail that features the Sidebar of Shame is related in any way to the Daily Mail that in the 1980s campaigned against sex in movies, on TV, in music, in art, or indeed anywhere else, is unclear.

Writing staff[edit]

"And I'm shakin' in me shoes
As I'm sending out the news,"
Said the man from the Daily Mail.
—Peadar Mac Ghiolla Chearra[78]

The Daily Mail's writers are often known for being stubbornly vitriolic, all of whom can turn a fly taking a shit on a scrapheap into a national outrage that threatens the very fabric of society itself. Whenever a mass health scare happens, you can almost guarantee that these people write more words on the subject than any informed and qualified science correspondent.

Notable ideologues include:

  • Peter Hitchens[79] — Hitchens was certainly at the forefront of bringing Tony Blair's son Leo into the arguments about the safety of the MMR vaccine; indeed, he went on about the kid and harassed Downing Street about it on an almost daily basis during the hoax. In more recent years, he's made an increasing number of anti-secularism rants.
  • Melanie Phillips[80] — A blogger once coined the phrase "I wouldn't wish it on anyone… except Melanie Phillips." She made George Monbiot's list of "top 10 climate change deniers."[81] A regular panel guest on the BBC's long-running political debate show Question Time, where she gleefully trolls the audience with her witch-like views.
  • Samantha Brick — Is constantly[82] banging on about just how fucking beautiful she is. Gained notoriety for this in 2012 when one of her articles, about how hard it was to be such a stunning specimen of visual human perfection because other women hated her for it, swept through the blogosphere like a turd attached to a tumbleweed made of LOLcats.
  • Amanda Platell[83] — A professional preacher and generally rather horrible person.
  • Richard Littlejohn[84] — Returned to the Mail in 2005 after a £800,000 per year deal to write for The Sun. Has the honour of being titled "The Stupid Person's Jeremy Clarkson" and author of a book once described as a "recruiting pamphlet for the BNP."[85] Amusingly parodied in Viz comic as 'Richard Littlecock', and curiously obsessed with the mechanics of male gay sex. Easily triggered, when he launches into ill-informed rants based solely on his prejudices, [86] and easily rebutted [87]. Has long referred to that unnecessary burden on business, Health and Safety, as "elf 'n' safety", and the lefty scam, human rights, as "yuman rites", mocking their imagined pronunciation by manual workers and other lesser humans. His readers parrot these spellings without knowing why they do it. Littlejohn often falls back on parodying current events in the style of Only Fools and Horses, Dad's Army, The Sweeney or Minder in rotation according to suitability, which tend to be painfully unfunny. Having lived in the gated community of Vero Beach, Florida for some years (a fact apparently unknown to his fans), his articles about what's happening in his beloved city of London would seem to be based less on what he's hearing while downing pints in the Dog and Duck and more on what he reads in the Daily Mail. It might also explain why his UK cultural references seem to date no later than the 1980s.
  • Quentin Letts[88] — His crowning achievements so far are, firstly, the claim, repeated in his book 50 People Who Buggered Up Britain, that Iraqi-born advertising executive and art connoisseur Charles Saatchi has done more damage to Britain than his countryman, the genocidal dictator Saddam Hussein. His second is trying to have an entire theatre shut down because he didn't much like a play they put on. Arsehole.
  • David Rose — Elitist with eugenicist beliefs. Originally known for hyping Iraqi WMD stories, he later issued a partial "oops" for penning the stories.[89] He then turned his skills to promoting global warming denial and got caught quote mining scientists and pushing denialist talking points numerous times.[90]


What's this thin sliver of a line? Yes, it's the Femail website with a bit of news on the side. The word count of the Femail side bar is in the region of 4,400 — the article only 260. Literally, only 4% of this page is actual article. Really.
…it's not really a conventional news site at all, more a big online bin full of pictures of reality stars, with the occasional Stephen Glover column lobbed in to lighten the mood.

Charlie Brooker[91]

"Femail" (besides being a terrible pun) is The Daily Mail's specific "women's section," dedicated to celebrities, their designer shoes (because of course, what overpriced clothes a woman is wearing is interesting), and other miscellaneous gossip. This is either one of the more depressing sections, or the only bit worth reading (as TV Tropes would say: "your mileage may vary"). Femail dominates the right hand margin of the Mail's website — usually extending several times the length of all other content — meaning that even if you only care about the political or medical stances of the paper while reading online, you certainly won't be able to escape the latest mega-important headlines about Kim Kardashian's latest photo-shoot or Victoria Beckham's latest publicity stunt. Its ubiquity on the site is either due to the paper's dedication to the feminist cause, treating women's issues with equal importance or because their machismo-full male readers like to have one off the wrist to a drunk Lindsay Lohan in their lunch breaks. The Femail section is also the place to see the most sexually explicit images that Mail can find, from the racy outfits of pop starlets to nude photoshoots or wardrobe malfunctions of celebrities. The Mail has often received some criticism for this section and accusations of outright hypocrisy, as the paper frequently complains of sexualised images broadcast on British television before the watershed time, but seems to have no problem in broadcasting these images and more to the world on a website that has no watershed time at all.

Notable is the tendency of Femail's female writers to adopt a critical and negative view of female matters (along the lines of "Yes, I'm female, but aren't feminists AWFUL?" or "As a woman I believe that men SHOULD be paid more"), thus supporting the overall misogynist tone of the paper. A perfect example would be the headline from 2018: "To bra or not to bra: It's the question at the heart of a new feminist battleground... so which of these two looks would YOU judge harshly?" Because you have to judge women harshly, whatever they do. [92]


While scientific surveys have shown that 73%[93] of the British population don't really give a fuck about religion, the Mail touts itself as the last bastion defence of 1400 years of UK Christian values. They stand defiant in the face of both the Muslim and the atheist threat, such as when the evil Beeb decided to remove the good and proper AD and BC in favour of CE and BCE… except nothing of the kind actually happened.[94] The BBC uses both, but the editor of the religion section of the website decided that BCE and CE were more appropriate religiously neutral terms, in line with the BBC's impartiality rather than its supposed atheistic bias. The Mail even went so far as to needlessly imply that it was a Muslim man advancing his own agenda.[95] Essentially, like all religious fundamentalists and political fringe groups, the Mail is simply interpreting actual neutrality as a bias against itself, rather than seeing its own biases and preferences for what they are.

Recently though, the Mail has been quite supporting of atheist claims such as the claim Jesus didn't exist, even publishing a nobody's claim on this matter.[96]



The Mail is known for obsessing over dangers from health scares (such as the Andrew Wakefield controversy) to paedophiles. With cancer, the Mail has found possibly its greatest asset in attempting to scare its readers into doing a lot of crazy shit. Among the items claimed by the paper to cause cancer (based on "scientific" research) are mouthwash, oral sex, Pringles, Facebook and coffee.[97][98] On the other hand, cures for cancer include tofu, the yellow fever vaccine, ketchup and coffee. Care is needed when interpreting the articles, as much of the evidence is mixed with nonsense. Some things such as mouthwash containing alcohol do indeed increase the risk of cancer — if you're an alcoholic extracting the alcohol from mouthwash for a buzz.

For the terminally confused, as the Mail is sometimes inconsistent on the subject, a near-enough full record of everything that cures and causes cancer is available at the 'Kill or Cure' website[99] and on the Daily Mail Oncological Project.[100][101]


See the main article on this topic: HPV vaccine

In April 2009, science blogger Martin Robbins, under the handle "The Lay Scientist", noted an interesting discrepancy in the policy of the Daily Mail. On the British edition, known for its scare stories on health, there was a demand to stop the compulsory administration of the HPV cervical cancer vaccine. This is fair enough and expected from the Daily Mail, as these people will go against any medical treatment given away for free. One underlying theme was the suspicion that young girls given the vaccine would immediately become promiscuous, having been freed from fear of contracting HPV, part of the longstanding puritanical worldview that underlies much of Daily Mail's content.

However, on the Irish edition, there was a campaign to "roll out the vaccine now!" demanding that the government issue it immediately, as in Ireland, it wasn't going to be issued as freely as in Britain. As the Daily Mail and the Irish Daily Mail are owned by the same people and have the same (alleged) editorial stance, this wasn't a case of The Guardian saying one thing and The Express saying another. This has led to people declaring that the Mail's true position is "whatever the government is for, we're against."[102]

Cannabis and schizophrenia[edit]

See the main articles on this topic: Marijuana woo and Schizophrenia

In October 2011, the Daily Mail printed an article that claimed "Just ONE cannabis joint can bring on schizophrenia as well as damaging memory."[103] This led to Dorothy Bishop, professor of neuroscience at Oxford University, awarding the Daily Mail the "Orwellian Prize for Journalistic Misrepresentation," for what she called "the worst misrepresentation of a scientific article in a national newspaper."[104]

The Press Complaints Commission refused to investigate it, though it's worth noting the article's author, Paul Dacre, was chairman of the PCC Editors’ Code of Practice Committee at the time.[105] Shortly after winning Prof. Bishop's "award," the Daily Fail did nothing to correct the misrepresentation, though they changed "causes schizophrenia" to "causes episodes similar to schizophrenia."


See the main article on this topic: Asbestos

Christopher Booker, one of the Daily Mail's star columnists, regularly takes up brave positions that run counter to science, fact, and reality. These include "scepticism" about climate change, a preference for intelligent design over evolution, and the belief that passive smoking is not bad for your health. He pushes even further with his own branch of reality by making repeated claims that white asbestos is "chemically identical to talcum powder" and the threat from it is so "vanishingly small" that a study by the UK's Health and Safety Executive had concluded that the danger was "insignificant" and with "arguably zero" risk of lung cancer.[106]

As usual with the Mail, the UK's Health and Safety Executive does not agree with Booker and has described his claims regarding asbestos as "substantially misleading."[107] It's probably coincidental that Booker's claims are strikingly similar to those of the British Asbestos Industry.[108]

And now the weather[edit]

The Mail gets many of its weather stories from two companies: the ironically-named Exacta Weather and the management speak-tastic Positive Weather Solutions. Their forecasters appear to have wide-ranging skills, from Ukrainian brides to stock photo models and sporters of emo hair. Thus far, they appear not have attained visibility in the field of meteorology. Thus the Mail appears to take its weather news from sources which are, shall we say, far from the action.[109]

Reliability as Wikipedia source[edit]

On 8 February 2017, a month-long discussion on English Wikipedia ended in a consensus that the Heil! was fit for use as toilet paper not a reliable source. The closing admin said, "The general themes of the support !votes centred on the Daily Mail’s reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism, and flat-out fabrication. […] There are multiple thousands of existing citations to the Daily Mail. Volunteers are encouraged to review them, and remove/replace them as appropriate".[110] This event was widely reported in the media (usually with an attitude of barely suppressed outrage or alternatively, unrestrained hilarity neutral journalistic objectivity),[111][112][113][114][115] with one difficult-to-explain exception. The editor who initiated the discussion was rapidly awarded three different BarnstarsWikipedia's W.svg and announced starting a Wikibreak.Wikipedia's W.svg

Reliability as a news source[edit]

The Daily Mail was initially given a "red" status by Newsguard, Microsoft's new default browser add-on that will warn users about the reliability of various news sources. However after constructive discussions with a Daily Mail executive Newsguard were forced to walk-back their rating and instead apply a "green" rating to Daily Mail, indicating it upholds basic standards and integrity in journalism. The US-based outlet acknowledged "We were wrong", and had been going by a popularly held view of the Daily Mail rather than actually doing research into it. "We were wrong " - US news rating tool boosts mail online trust ranking.

Best of the Daily Fail[edit]

A spoof Daily Mail front page.

Here is a selection of some of the best — for the wrong reasons — articles put out by the Daily Mail:

  • "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" was the Mail's front page headline on 8 July 1934. However, despite the Mail's efforts, the British Union of Fascists never did achieve widespread popularity.
  • In 1956, it described rock 'n' roll as "deplorable" and "tribal", adding that "it surely originated in the jungle. We sometimes wonder whether this is the Negro's revenge.[116]
  • Amanda Knox found guilty - so the Mail decided to release the wrong pre-written story regarding the appeal of accused murderer Amanda Knox. Highlights include reactions from prosecutors who said they were delighted, a description of how she collapsed in a chair sobbing and would be placed on suicide watch. (Knox was actually declared "not-guilty" at the actual appeal, in case you missed the punchline.) The Mail wasn't the only paper to do this. The Sun also briefly had both versions of events on its website and both The Grauniad and Sky News also jumped the gun with the wrong verdict, but didn't start making stuff up to fill the word count. The thing is, the fact that a false story contained so much detail immediately calls into question the veracity of the details contained in the correct version, as both were blatantly written before the fact with plausible and widely applicable details in place.
  • A strange, lonely and troubling death... - the controversial article by Jan Moir on the death of Stephen Gately, known for being quite shockingly homophobic and leaping to conclusions as if Moir had suddenly become an expert coroner. The article was originally titled "Why there was nothing 'natural' about Stephen Gately's death."[117]
  • Curiously absent from the Daily Mail's archives, in 1997, columnist Lynda Lee-Potter described Mo Mowlam, Labour MP and Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, as an "only slightly effeminate Geordie trucker", due to her hair that looked like a wig and her recent weight gain. The paper was forced to apologise after it emerged that Mowlam had lost her hair due to cancer and that her weight gain was due to medication.
  • In September 2013 (and smeared out over more articles and opinion columns than are worth listing, but here's a BBC link to explain it), the Mail attacked Labour Party leader Ed Miliband for having a father - the Marxist academic Ralph Miliband - who "hated Britain". This was ironic in numerous ways:
  1. A key piece of "evidence" for this was the 17 year-old Ralph's diary that called the English "perhaps the most nationalist people in the world," which of course is something you could easily conclude ever looking at the Mail;
  2. Miliband was a staunch anti-Stalinist,[118] so his political views look more like Orwell's than the Great Satan the Mail presented; and
  3. Most staggeringly is the fact that the Mail would push such a smear campaign in the face of their own history in cosying up to Adolf "the Great" Hitler and the National Front; Ralph Miliband, on the other hand, fled to the UK in 1940 to avoid anti-Semitic persecution, enlisted in the Royal Navy, and served in the D-Day landings. This prompted a particular public savaging by Mehdi Hasan on the BBC's Question Time programme,[119] a pwnage which in turn prompted the Mail to respond with a smear campaign against Hasan that did everything but outright say "that muzzie towelhead should go back where he came from." Daily Mail doubled down after the election to claim that "a source within the Labour Party" had revealed that had Ed Miliband won he intended to have a 100 foot high bust of himself carved into the White Cliffs of Dover. This was later amended to the cliffs of Cheddar Gorge, but interestingly not one other media outlet ran this incredible story of Stalinistic hubris. Readers were not put off by the unlikelihood of this egregious lie, one commenting that it didn't surprise him and that "You couldn't make it up". [120]
  • In 2014, the Mail referred to the perpetrators of Northern Ireland's Bloody Sunday massacre as "our brave Paras" and demanded they not be prosecuted for the crime.

Broken clock moment[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Stopped clock

Despite its share of stupid news, Daily Mail also has its moments of shining journalism. The newspaper published an exposé on how British billionaire financier Nat Rothschild treated British Labour minister and EU commissioner Lord Mandelson with a private jet and luxury dining to meet his Russian pal Oleg Deripaska. Not coincidentally, Oleg Deripaska owned an aluminum plant that exported the metal to Europe. Nat Rothschild, being the skinny billionaire he is, sued the paper for libel, but a High Court judge sided with the paper and threw out the lawsuit.[121]

See also[edit]

External links[edit]



  1. [1] Titanic Newspaper Archive' ' Retrieved 14 June 2017
  2. The Ralph Miliband I knew embodied the British values the Daily Mail rejects. Ian Aitken, The Guardian, 3 October 2013. Retrieved 6 November 2014.
  3. Dictionary of the Turtle
  4. Unreliable Sources, John Simpson
  5. See the Wikipedia article on Esmond Harmsworth, 2nd Viscount Rothermere.
  6. Obituary: Viscount Rothermere, Independent, 1998
  7. Ian Hislop lets rip at Daily Mail and Rothermere family over 'embarrassing' Ed Miliband row on HIGNFY, Daily Mirror, 4 Oct 2013
  8. News Corp accuses Daily Mail Australia of plagiarism. The Guardian: 9 June 2014.
  9. [2]
  10. [3]
  11. Metropolitan Police Press Release — Partnership working sees fraudster jailed
  12. Iraqi asylum cheat who got £700,000 in benefits, three houses and private school for her son!
  13. Mail Online — search for "BBC"
  14. Mail Online — search for "liberal bias" Articles are almost exclusively about the BBC.
  15. Daily Mail-o-matic
  16. ‘Scrounger’ Stigma Discouraging Would-be Benefit Claimants
  17. [4]
  18. [5]
  23. [[
  24. [6]
  25. [7]
  26. [8]
  27. [9]
  28. [10]
  29. [11]
  30. [12]
  31. [13]
  33. [14]
  34. [15]
  35. Pop Music and the Press, Steve Jones, p.114
  36. [16]
  37. [17]
  39. [18]
  40. [19]
  41. [20]
  42. [21]
  43. [22]
  44. [23]
  46. [24]
  47. [25]
  53. [26]
  54. [27]
  55. [28]
  56. [29]
  57. [30]
  58. [31]
  59. [32]
  61. [33]
  62. [34]
  63. [35]
  64. [36]
  68. [37]
  69. [[
  70. [38]
  71. [39]
  72. Daily Mail reader comments about the new Doctor Who companions will have you hiding behind the sofa, The Poke, 23 Oct 2017
  73. Doctor Who 13: How the World Reacted to the New, Female, Doctor, BrandWatch, 17 July 2017
  74. Steven Moffat: Brexit voters delayed female Doctor, BBC News, 4 Dec 2017
  75. News Crud — ItsyOtsy
  76. Daily Mail Proxy Site IstyOsty Goes Down After Cease And Desist Order
  77. Brown, Andrew. The shocking thing about the Mail Online's sidebar of shame The Grauniad. Saturday 24 March 2012 13.00 GMT.
  79. Daily Mail — Peter Hitchens
  80. Daily Mail — Melanie Phillips
  81. Monbiot's Top 10
  82. She was doing it long before the "women hate me because I'm beautiful" clusterfuck.
  83. Daily Mail — Amanda Platell
  84. Daily Mail — Richard Littlejohn
  85. "Self v Littlejohn" BBC Radio Five Live, via the BBC News website.
  86. [40]
  87. [41]
  88. Daily Mail — Quentin Letts
  89. David Rose: Iraq leaders tricked us with WMD lies, but we must not get fooled again, I feel shame and regret for having supported the Iraq why can't Tony Blair?
  90. See George Monbiot and Deep Climate on "Rosegate," Tim Lambert's series and Potholer54 for in-depth coverage.
  91. Charlie Brooker - When the Daily Mail calls right-wingers stupid, the result is dumbogeddon
  92. [[
  93. Religiosity Highest in World's Poorest Nations, Gallup
  94. Reality check: has the BBC dropped the terms BC/AD?, The Guardian
  95. How the BBC's dark forces of political correctness threaten the Christian era, The Lay Scientist
  96. [42]
  97. 20 Strange Things The Daily Mail Say Will Cause Cancer
  98. Russel Howard ‐ The Daily Mail Cancer Song
  99. Kill or cure — Help to make sense of the Daily Mail’s ongoing effort to classify every inanimate object into those that cause cancer and those that prevent it.
  100. DM Oncological Project (old WordPress blog)
  101. DM Oncological Project (new Tumblr blog)
  102. The Daily Mail: Campaigning both For and Against the HPV Vaccine in Different Countries Simultaneously
  103. Here it is.
  104. Daily Mail Editor Paul Dacre Wins Orwellian Prize for Journalistic Misrepresentation over "Just One Cannabis Joint Can Bring On Scizophrenia[sic"]
  106. Asbestos saga proves our feeble press watchdog has no bark and no bite, The Lay Scientist
  107. Article: "Farmers face £6 bn bill for asbestos clean up", HSE
  108. The British Asbestos Newspaper!
  109. Do the weather forecasters used by the Daily Mail actually exist?, The Guardian
  110. Wikipedia - Daily Mail RfC
  111. Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as 'unreliable' source The Guardian: 8 February 2017
  112. Wikipedia bans the Daily Mail as a source for being 'unreliable' The Independent: 9 February 2017
  113. Daily Mail Banned As ‘Reliable Source’ On Wikipedia In Unprecedented Move Huffington Post: 9 February 2017
  114. Wikipedia bans editors from citing Daily Mail as source Fox News[sic]: 9 February 2017
  115. Wikipedia editors ban ‘unreliable’ Daily Mail as source] Hindustan Times: 9 February 2017
  116. Dr Roberta Freund Schwartz (28 January 2013). How Britain Got the Blues: The Transmission and Reception of American Blues Style in the United Kingdom. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.. pp. 61. ISBN 978-1-4094-9376-1. 
  117. Charlie Brooker - Why there was nothing 'human' about Jan Moir's column on the death of Stephen Gately
  118. Times of London? They must be communist.
  119. Watch: Mehdi Hasan smacks down the Daily Mail on Question Time
  120. [43]