Misleading Headline?

[sp1814]

Is the Mail on Sunday trying to stir up hatred against gay people (again)?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2714321/NHS-fund-sperm-bank-lesbians-New-generation-fatherless-families-paid-YOU.html

[jno]

if lesbians are getting free NHS specs too, I shall definitely complain to someone.

[joeluke]

Whatever happened to the good old turkey baster method using a friends sperm?

[sp1814]

joeluke

Unfortunately due to EU rules, turkey Basterds can one only be three inches in length, rendering them as ineffectual as a means of reproduction.

[anotheoldgit]

jno

/// If lesbians are getting free NHS specs too, I shall definitely complain to someone. ///

I complain all the time about some getting rose tinted specs, but it does no good.

[New Judge]

"FREE NHS SPECS FOR MUSLIM KIDS"

Nothing misleading about that at all, sp. It does not give me the impression that the free specs are only for Muslim children. It tells me that Muslim children are being provided with free specs in the same way as the headline which started all this off tells me that lesbians are being provided with access to a sperm bank.

Whether you believe that it is right and proper to place an emphasis on only one section of people being provided with the service is another argument. There may be some people who believe that such services should not be provided for lesbians. They will be attracted to the article which is the whole point. It's not misleading, it's just targeting their audience selectively. Which is what most of the press does.

There's really little point in continually criticising how the Daily/Sunday Mail chooses to publish its articles. You know that they deliberately skew their headlines and text to suit their agenda.

[sp1814]

New Judge

You wrote:

"Whether you believe that it is right and proper to place an emphasis on only one section of people being provided with the service is another argument"

Actually, that's the core of my question.

It's literally, *this* argument.

[EDDIE51]

To those who have not clicked on the link provided at 13.02 by sp1814 which is from the actual 'paper' version of the 'Wail' rather than the 'on-line version' it says and I quote>>
'NHS TO FUND SPERM BANK FOR LESBIANS'
Now that IS misleading !!

[EDDIE51]

^^ I revise my last comment, it is not just misleading it is a downright lie !
as reading the rest of the article proves. Problem is a lot of 'readers' just glance at the headline and make their judgment on that alone.

[THECORBYLOON]

I'm missing something obviously. The headline in the paper seems to be the same as the first bit of the online version so does it not convey the same message?

[EDDIE51]

^^ The 'paper version just uses the words
NHS TO FUND SPERM BANK FOR LESBIANS
in banner headline
The rest is in small print, that is the difference, people tend to just read the headline. The on-line version goes on to say the rest of it about ' new generation fatherless families' in the same size print which qualifies the first 7 words.

[pixie373]

So much of the report is criticising "designer babies" too, on the basis that the customer can choose appearance and characteristics of the donor. Do they not realise women choose mates in the same way?

[Orderlimit]

Not really misleading - just some people exercising their right to be offended.

[tonyav]

Not the headline on this write up.
http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/trust-to-launch-national-sperm-bank-1

[sp1814]

Orderlimit

I am astounded that you can't see that the headline is misleading.

Seriously. It's really odd.

[pixie373]

Sorry, didn't answer the question. It's misleading in a lot of ways- the implication that the sperm bank has been set up for lesbians, that there will be a "generation of fatherless children" and that lesbians need taxpayers money to bring up their children. The headline is saying that the new generation will be funded by taxpayers- not that the sperm bank is.

[pixie373]

What evidence, divebuddy?
I do agree that any IVF treatment is not life-saving, but the same goes for a lot of treatments. With 4 children, I'm not in the best place to judge whether fertility should be an NHS issue. Perhaps it should, with a limit.

[sherrardk]

It's completely misleading, did everyone miss the section that stated - ‘The aim is that we will have enough surplus sperm so that we will be able to set up a service for people like single women and same-sex couples.’ Probably haven't got any new 'benefit scrounger' stories to get people frothing at the mouth.