Daily Mail

[darren]

No, I was being serious, whats the point?

There are some people on this site who consider the millions of people who read the mail beyond contempt and in some way sub human. The readers are either contemptible because they allow the mail to warp there views, or are contemptible because they have views that are reflected by the mail.

But like I said, "f*** it I can't be arsed"

That's it from me folks.

 

[Bottlebank]

Antwan, hadn't realised the Mail was printed on softer paper, thanks for the tip

 

[Peter Burgess]

I would never buy it unless I ran out of bog paper and dock leaves.

Really? In such circumstances I would rummage in someone else's recycle bin for one rather than buy one.

 

[Laurie]

The BBC (a long time ago) reported a group of scouts trapped in GB cave in Burrington Combe.
Should we boycott them also?  :

 

[Peter Burgess]

Oh yes, Laurie. Such a hateful thing to publish, don't you think......

 

[RobinGriffiths]

I quite enjoy a bit of DM red/green arrow baiting. I spot a likely looking DM article, possibly involving gypsies, single mothers or Ukip, then I leave a comment either reflecting or opposing my perceived view of the opinions of the readership. Then I sit back and see whether the green/red arrows are in agreement with my assesment. I'll leave it for you to decide the results.

 

[Tony_B]

As it happens, Rhys, I don?t like the Daily Mail?s worldview either. But I fundamentally disagree with you on this; in my view anything that presents a positive view of caving is A Good Thing. I was going to add ?even if it?s the Daily Mail? but actually I should say ?especially if it?s the Daily Mail?.

Allow me to explain: a significant proportion of the DM?s readership would probably go along with the idea that cavers are just irresponsible idiots who achieve nothing other than putting at risk the lives of the poor people who have to come and rescue us. We?ve all come across this view at some time or other. Now if the newspaper and/or its website uses words and photos that show some of the beauty and wonder of the underground world then surely there?s a chance that even one or two of those people might realize there?s a bit more to caving than the lurid rescue stories that are otherwise the only time our sport appears in the news?

On the subject of discouraging click-throughs?well, again, surely if caving articles get a respectable number of page-views then the editors might be encouraged to use more of this kind of stuff in future? Like it or not, the Daily Mail?s website is hugely popular, not because of its editorial slant but because it publishes a lot of feature material that people find interesting. And if they want to run lots of caving photos then that?s fine by me.

 

[Rhys]

As it happens, Rhys, I don?t like the Daily Mail?s worldview either.

But by clicking on their links, you're funding it. Funding the hatred.

I can't deny that positive press for caving is a good thing, but perfectly reasonable and sensible people are being seduced into funding the hatred by the promise of a few pretty pictures to look at. The pictures are nice, but we all know that the words are junk. It's a comic posing as a newspaper. To be fair to them, they've got a great business model and it's working well for them. Profits from their papers are falling, but revenue form the online version is skyrocketing - which subsidises the bile factory. If they thought there was a demand, they could publish a cave story every week, but we all know that the words would be utter shite. It's a price not worth paying, in my view.

Tony, have you sold, or would you sell your photos to the Daily Mail? Genuine question to a professional photographer, nothing personal...

Rhys

 

[Peter Burgess]

Thank you, Rhys, for pointing out that by visiting a Mail Online page I am indirectly contributing to the coffers of an organ I loathe. I hadn't thought about it, so your post has been useful. I am capable of making up my own mind on these things, and do not object to being reminded of something I might not have considered otherwise.

 

[Tony_B]

Tony, have you sold, or would you sell your photos to the Daily Mail? Genuine question to a professional photographer, nothing personal...

Rhys

I haven't. But I'd have no problem doing so, unless I suspected that my work was going to be used in a way that I disagreed with (for example, a 'cavers are irresponsible idiots' story). The trouble is that when you make a picture sale you don't usually get any sort of editorial control! But I'll happily relieve Associated Newspapers of some of their profits...

 

[Bottlebank]

it's always had and always will have an "Idle chat" section for cavers to chat about whatever they wish.  Are you trying to censor me?! ;-)

Hadn't realised Idle Chat was about anything, I'd assumed it was about caving. I stand corrected.

Must go, need to get back to the Vatican website before the new chief removes all the "we hate gays" speeches and starts shoving up pay per click ads for condoms.

Robin, love the arrow baiting idea, wish I'd thought of it!

 

[paul]

SHOCK, HORROR. PROBE!

Caver says fellow cavers are "irrseponsible idiots"!!!

cavers are just irresponsible idiots who achieve nothing other than putting at risk the lives of the poor people who have to come and rescue us.

 

[ChrisJC]

Well I will be visiting the Daily Mail website as often as I choose. I enjoy the stories, and I enjoy the eye candy on the right hand side.
I realise I may lean the opposite way to the loony-lefties, this is my right in a democratic society.
The DM is a useful counterpoint to the likes of the BBC and pseudo-intellectual Guardian.

Chris.

 

[Peter Burgess]

I don't give a toss about it's place on the political spectrum. It's the bile it emits that is offensive. That has nothing to do with politics. Anyone who thinks otherwise is missing the point that Rhys is making.

 

[graham]

Well I will be visiting the Daily Mail website as often as I choose. I enjoy the stories, and I enjoy the eye candy on the right hand side.
I realise I may lean the opposite way to the loony-lefties, this is my right in a democratic society.
The DM is a useful counterpoint to the likes of the BBC and pseudo-intellectual Guardian.

Chris.

Nobody has attempted to prevent you. If you wish to support these unpleasant liars that is entirely your perogative.

 

[Laurie]

....or even your prerogative.  :
Surely that's what the OP was trying to persuade us to do....

 

[robjones]

"irrseponsible idiots

Was that supposed to be the Mail or the Gruinard? 

 

[Brains]

Speaking from experience the DM is a hateful rag that seems to put things in the worst possible way to peddle to their readership

 

[graham]

....or even your prerogative.  :
Surely that's what the OP was trying to persuade us to do....

Persuade,  yes. Force,  no.

What is wrong with that?

 

[grahams]

I quite enjoy a bit of DM red/green arrow baiting. I spot a likely looking DM article, possibly involving gypsies, single mothers or Ukip, then I leave a comment either reflecting or opposing my perceived view of the opinions of the readership. Then I sit back and see whether the green/red arrows are in agreement with my assesment. I'll leave it for you to decide the results.

Ha, ha, I do that too. The best fun is to be had with the Guardian readers who are afflicted by PC absolutism and, like the paper, have appalling spelling skills.