ChatterBank1 min ago
Should We Be Grateful To Such Newspapers As The Daily Mail?
60 Answers
Is it advantageous for national newspapers such as the Daily Mail to report on various stories which for some strange reason other papers fail to report on?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Not especially.
It would appear from the phrasing of your OP that you perceive the Mail as being a crusading paper that addresses stories which are not addressed by others.
I suggest that this is according them with a degree of morality and desire to expose uncomfortable truths that would otherwise remain hidden.
The Mail functions like any other daily paper - it adopts and adheres to its agenda which is both supported and driven by its readership - and its primary function is to obtain advertising revenues for its owners.
My point is that, in common with all other papers, the Mail's bottom line is readership and revenue, and the notion that it is crusading is, in my view, erroneous.
It would appear from the phrasing of your OP that you perceive the Mail as being a crusading paper that addresses stories which are not addressed by others.
I suggest that this is according them with a degree of morality and desire to expose uncomfortable truths that would otherwise remain hidden.
The Mail functions like any other daily paper - it adopts and adheres to its agenda which is both supported and driven by its readership - and its primary function is to obtain advertising revenues for its owners.
My point is that, in common with all other papers, the Mail's bottom line is readership and revenue, and the notion that it is crusading is, in my view, erroneous.
-- answer removed --
Indeed Islay - I reiterate my point - The Mail has been involved in some successful campaigning journalism, but to suggest that it is anything more than a happy by-product of its need to drive ads and revenue, is to accord it a sense of moral responsibility, which I don't believe it possesses.
Not because it's The Mail - my view is the same of all media outlets.
Not because it's The Mail - my view is the same of all media outlets.
AOG
Absolutely.
Same as other publications.
However, unlike other newspapers the Daily Mail keeps posting stories about teenage girls who are (allegedly) 'all grown up'.
I think that this damages their brand - together with the paper's ongoing need to report on everything that Kim Kashadian and their brood do.
I think it's a poor newspaper due to the amount of clickbait it publishes, plus the shameful scraping of content from Bored Panda, together with the number of times it's transgressed Betteridge's Law.
Additionally, the sheer volume of churnalism that it publishes as 'news' is appalling.
But in answer to your question - it's absolutely vital that the Daily Mail continues to publish stories that its readership wants to read, and it is not wrong for the paper to editorialise within news content.
This is the same as any other publication.
Absolutely.
Same as other publications.
However, unlike other newspapers the Daily Mail keeps posting stories about teenage girls who are (allegedly) 'all grown up'.
I think that this damages their brand - together with the paper's ongoing need to report on everything that Kim Kashadian and their brood do.
I think it's a poor newspaper due to the amount of clickbait it publishes, plus the shameful scraping of content from Bored Panda, together with the number of times it's transgressed Betteridge's Law.
Additionally, the sheer volume of churnalism that it publishes as 'news' is appalling.
But in answer to your question - it's absolutely vital that the Daily Mail continues to publish stories that its readership wants to read, and it is not wrong for the paper to editorialise within news content.
This is the same as any other publication.
By the way AOG - a question.
I have seen many pot shots taken at loads of publications I read (Independent, New Statesman, Guardian), but have never felt the need to defend them, because I'm a content consumer rather than a content creator (I don't work for any of those publications).
Why do feel the need to defend the Daily Mail?
Are you Paul Dacre?
By the way - does anyone know why Paul Dacre is called 'The Vagina Monologue'?
I do.
It's grim.
I have seen many pot shots taken at loads of publications I read (Independent, New Statesman, Guardian), but have never felt the need to defend them, because I'm a content consumer rather than a content creator (I don't work for any of those publications).
Why do feel the need to defend the Daily Mail?
Are you Paul Dacre?
By the way - does anyone know why Paul Dacre is called 'The Vagina Monologue'?
I do.
It's grim.
-- answer removed --