Death Of Three Young Ladies Backpacking...
News6 mins ago
Citizens Of Uk Opinion Of Obama? Curious American.
120 Answers
i am curious what the general (REAL) opinion of our current president is outside the USA.
Answers
Well here is another minority view. This site is primarily a 'Left-Wing' site with strong political correct liberal views, and anyone who does not agree with their views are generally labelled Racist, Fascist, etc. so it is not at all surprising at the answers you have received, But then this has already been highlighted by such comments to you as: "If you...
12:04 Wed 02nd Jan 2013
sp1814
/// Just to enlighten us - how would you describe
the Daily Mail? ///
The Daily Mail will print stories in depth, covering a mix of subjects.
And unlike popular accusations it is not racist, but then on the other hand it will not shy from reporting on a crime even if the perpetrators happen to be black or Asian, but of course at the same time they will equally expose wrongdoers no matter what their skin colour may be.
They will also criticise all political parties equally if the need arises, unlike some other newspapers who stick firmly to their political leanings.
They also cater for all interests and genders, it's own 'FEMAIL' and 'FEMAIL TODAY' sections are a prime example.
Some stories may seem at times rather gossipy or even sensationalist, but hey they have to sell their product and some days are slow news days.
But the main reason it seems that some do not like the paper, is because it will report on matters that some do not wish to be reported on, although at time these same 'haters' are not slow in using it's web-site if something fits in with their own particular criteria.
/// Just to enlighten us - how would you describe
the Daily Mail? ///
The Daily Mail will print stories in depth, covering a mix of subjects.
And unlike popular accusations it is not racist, but then on the other hand it will not shy from reporting on a crime even if the perpetrators happen to be black or Asian, but of course at the same time they will equally expose wrongdoers no matter what their skin colour may be.
They will also criticise all political parties equally if the need arises, unlike some other newspapers who stick firmly to their political leanings.
They also cater for all interests and genders, it's own 'FEMAIL' and 'FEMAIL TODAY' sections are a prime example.
Some stories may seem at times rather gossipy or even sensationalist, but hey they have to sell their product and some days are slow news days.
But the main reason it seems that some do not like the paper, is because it will report on matters that some do not wish to be reported on, although at time these same 'haters' are not slow in using it's web-site if something fits in with their own particular criteria.
The readership of the Daily Mail is 52 per cent female, 48 per cent male.
It appeals most to people over 54; the average age of its readership is 56. This is remarkable. Other papers such as The Times and The Guardian have an equal spread of readers in the groups 24 and up with only a slightly higher readership over 65. The Mail has readership of 19.1% age 55-64 and 40% 65 and over. The other groups are: 15-24 8.76, 25-34 7.91,35-44 9.42, and 45-54 14.76%
Its readership is 4,280,000 on a daily sale of 1,660,545 [July 2012, Audit Bureau of Circulations; other figures January to July 2012, National Readership Survey]
It has to appeal to an old readership. Older people are more conservative (in the original sense) than younger ones, with all that entails. And what that entails may be a hankering for the past and the view that every change in Britain is for the worse ( both sentiments have been those of old men for hundreds or thousands of years, across countries and cultures. It never was like it was in their young days).
The Telegraph a paper of the Right does not appear to have the same enthusiasm for crimes involving Muslim suspects that the Mail has, aog. The Times certainly doesn't. That may reflect the interests of the Mail's age groups, more than a reluctance on the part of the Times to acknowledge, report, or give promininence to such events, don't you think, aog? Your age group loves such stories, regardless of how significant or insignificant these are in the context of national news.
It appeals most to people over 54; the average age of its readership is 56. This is remarkable. Other papers such as The Times and The Guardian have an equal spread of readers in the groups 24 and up with only a slightly higher readership over 65. The Mail has readership of 19.1% age 55-64 and 40% 65 and over. The other groups are: 15-24 8.76, 25-34 7.91,35-44 9.42, and 45-54 14.76%
Its readership is 4,280,000 on a daily sale of 1,660,545 [July 2012, Audit Bureau of Circulations; other figures January to July 2012, National Readership Survey]
It has to appeal to an old readership. Older people are more conservative (in the original sense) than younger ones, with all that entails. And what that entails may be a hankering for the past and the view that every change in Britain is for the worse ( both sentiments have been those of old men for hundreds or thousands of years, across countries and cultures. It never was like it was in their young days).
The Telegraph a paper of the Right does not appear to have the same enthusiasm for crimes involving Muslim suspects that the Mail has, aog. The Times certainly doesn't. That may reflect the interests of the Mail's age groups, more than a reluctance on the part of the Times to acknowledge, report, or give promininence to such events, don't you think, aog? Your age group loves such stories, regardless of how significant or insignificant these are in the context of national news.
Interesting facts about The Mail Fred
my prejudice lies in what a journalist friend has told me about his period freelancing for them a few years ago.
In a nutshell:
a) their brief to staff writers and stringers alike was that the editors were especially interested in a certain type of story - pretty much fitting your criteria. Those stories would be bought to the exclusion of other stories that might have provided more balance
b) the Mail editors were less than scrupulous in verifying and substantiating the accuracy of stories especially when they fulfilled a)
Your assessment is correct;
It isn't that The Mail /will report on matters that some do not wish to be reported on/
It's the fact that it misrepresents their significance in order to fit their readership's existing distorted view of the world
my prejudice lies in what a journalist friend has told me about his period freelancing for them a few years ago.
In a nutshell:
a) their brief to staff writers and stringers alike was that the editors were especially interested in a certain type of story - pretty much fitting your criteria. Those stories would be bought to the exclusion of other stories that might have provided more balance
b) the Mail editors were less than scrupulous in verifying and substantiating the accuracy of stories especially when they fulfilled a)
Your assessment is correct;
It isn't that The Mail /will report on matters that some do not wish to be reported on/
It's the fact that it misrepresents their significance in order to fit their readership's existing distorted view of the world
the Mail's website is very Heaty. Every time aog links to a story on it, I confidently look forward to being distracted by someone over on the right of the page being overwhelmed by her cellulite. This is, I think, the Mail's attempt to seek a younger audience. The newspaper itself hasn't achieved this.
I like him, he seems very competent. He's much better than Bush but that isn't hard. I can't believe American's even contemplated Romney, he would have been awful for the world. Labelling China a currency manipulator on day 1? That's sure to start to good relations with the next super power. He also said many other stupid things about other countries. I wish the Democrats had control of congress, that way they could actually get stuff done. Instead they have to battle with the party that considers health care a privilege and owning a gun a right.
I get most of my news from the BBC, which is politically neutral. (say what you want about the BBC's neutrality towards other things, I believe it does politics quite well). Occasionally I also read some left wing papers about embarrassing/bad stories about the Tories (the BBC can be too neutral sometimes. eg the story about newly released archives saying that Thatcher wanted to introduce compulsory school fees was no where to be found on the BBC http://
I get most of my news from the BBC, which is politically neutral. (say what you want about the BBC's neutrality towards other things, I believe it does politics quite well). Occasionally I also read some left wing papers about embarrassing/bad stories about the Tories (the BBC can be too neutral sometimes. eg the story about newly released archives saying that Thatcher wanted to introduce compulsory school fees was no where to be found on the BBC http://
Re Hillary Clinton - the only diagnosis I can think of where anticoagulation would be indicated would be a cerebral sinus thrombosis. Treatment would be initally with heparin then usually warfarin...
http://
http://
..as indeed seems to have been the case, so no mystery there.
http://
http://
This I think sums up the Mail's online presence perfectly:
http://
http://
/// Interesting facts about The Mail Fred ///
'Facts', are you absolutely sure about that, or are they just Fred's opinions?
Take the issue regarding Muslims, the Daily Mail and the Telegraph, absolute poppycock.
For example take one big concern, that being the widespread child grooming cases, which were carried out by Pakistani men, these were reported by all the newspapers, not just the Daily Mail because the perpetrators happened to be Muslim.
'Facts', are you absolutely sure about that, or are they just Fred's opinions?
Take the issue regarding Muslims, the Daily Mail and the Telegraph, absolute poppycock.
For example take one big concern, that being the widespread child grooming cases, which were carried out by Pakistani men, these were reported by all the newspapers, not just the Daily Mail because the perpetrators happened to be Muslim.
jno
/// I confidently look forward to being distracted by someone over on the right of the page being overwhelmed by her cellulite. ///
Just as I said, the Daily Mail caters for all tastes, although I must admit cellulite is definitely of no interest to me, but it takes all sorts I suppose, why are you so interested jno?
/// This is, I think, the Mail's attempt to seek a younger audience. The newspaper itself hasn't achieved this. ///
I don't think many youngsters of today have the slightest interest in newspapers, full stop.
Incidentally shouldn't that be "attempt to seek a younger readership" rather than audience?
/// I confidently look forward to being distracted by someone over on the right of the page being overwhelmed by her cellulite. ///
Just as I said, the Daily Mail caters for all tastes, although I must admit cellulite is definitely of no interest to me, but it takes all sorts I suppose, why are you so interested jno?
/// This is, I think, the Mail's attempt to seek a younger audience. The newspaper itself hasn't achieved this. ///
I don't think many youngsters of today have the slightest interest in newspapers, full stop.
Incidentally shouldn't that be "attempt to seek a younger readership" rather than audience?
/Incidentally shouldn't that be "attempt to seek a younger readership" rather than audience? /
No
'Audience' is a generic term commonly used in media planning to describe a defined group addressed by any medium be it TV, print, Direct Mail, Online, Radio, Outdoor Media etc
/'Facts', are you absolutely sure about that, or are they just Fred's opinions?/
No
Fred quoted circulation and readership demographics - those are the facts on which he based his hypotheses
No
'Audience' is a generic term commonly used in media planning to describe a defined group addressed by any medium be it TV, print, Direct Mail, Online, Radio, Outdoor Media etc
/'Facts', are you absolutely sure about that, or are they just Fred's opinions?/
No
Fred quoted circulation and readership demographics - those are the facts on which he based his hypotheses
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.