It is currently Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:11 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Re: Mail front page discussion

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:34 am
Posts: 10881
Location: Sorta London
It's certaintly a "don't judge a book by its cover" moment, as the rest of what constitutes news in this Paper is foaming at the mouth rubbish about liberal elites, "scum" and other such tough talking dogma.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 957
Are we going to see a change in the Mail's targets? From worrying their readers about explodey Muslims to telling them all about law breaking black people?

_________________
The upper hand is on the other foot now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:43 pm
Posts: 4323
Location: 'An English seaport town, principally remarkable for mud, Jews and sailors' – Dickens
Tom_MKUK wrote:
I am encouraged though, that they are offering a Muslim man as a positive role model for a change, rather than the usual demonisation.

The Mail can be nice about people of colour as long as they fit into a narrative of decent innocent victims suffering at the hands of yobs / gangs / feral youth (see especially Stephen Lawrence). And by emphasising the peaceful nature of this father at the same time as his Asian-ness, the Mail is underlining his unusualness. 'You wouldn't expect this from a Muslim, would you?' is the connotation. The Mail is demonising Muslims even as it applauds one.

The front page also allows the Mail to differentiate itself from 'racists', who in the Mail's eyes are people that commit bodily violence against, or some kind of sustained virulent persecution of, individuals who are not white. The 'symbolic racism' that appears in the Mail every day is indisputably not the same thing; the Mail (and many of its readers) don't acknowledge the link.

Bails wrote:
Are we going to see a change in the Mail's targets? From worrying their readers about explodey Muslims to telling them all about law breaking black people?

No. It will carry on doing both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:08 am
Posts: 15074
Bails wrote:
Are we going to see a change in the Mail's targets? From worrying their readers about explodey Muslims to telling them all about law breaking black people?


What we're seeing is a disoriented backlash from a paper that's been on the back foot for 5 weeks.
First NI and then Brevik.
All their heroes have been tarnished, some of their supposed enemies elevated to hero status.
They're praying like hell that the car that ran those 3 men down wasn't driven by an EDL activist.

Even now they're paralysed by lack of a handle on any facts.
They see the riots as a great opportunity to even the score, but don't know how to play it.
Hence the lack of consistency in their storytelling.
Meanwhile they're trying to coalesce a point of attack within the nebulous "liberal elite".

At present that appears to consist of Harriet Harman and comprehensive schools.
I expect a full on attempt to associate all the mails usual hate figures with the rioting, while lionising the hot air merchants of the Tory right.

Give it a month and we'll be treated to tearful recollections of the day when Boris swept the scum off the streets with his broomstick.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:07 am
Posts: 16503
Location: Brigadoon
Don't forget also that the obvious Mail target for something it hates (Twitter / Facebook) went on to be used for things the Mail would approve of and thus showing that it wasn't just full of rioting yobs putting up pictures of themselves breaking into Dorothy Perkins.

The Mail is scared. And not of the looters and rioters.

_________________
"They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say...let 'em crash."
- "Counter Point", Airplane! (1980)

Things can only get better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:14 pm
Posts: 3168
ezinra wrote:
Tom_MKUK wrote:
I am encouraged though, that they are offering a Muslim man as a positive role model for a change, rather than the usual demonisation.

The Mail can be nice about people of colour as long as they fit into a narrative of decent innocent victims suffering at the hands of yobs / gangs / feral youth (see especially Stephen Lawrence). And by emphasising the peaceful nature of this father at the same time as his Asian-ness, the Mail is underlining his unusualness. 'You wouldn't expect this from a Muslim, would you?' is the connotation. The Mail is demonising Muslims even as it applauds one.

The front page also allows the Mail to differentiate itself from 'racists', who in the Mail's eyes are people that commit bodily violence against, or some kind of sustained virulent persecution of, individuals who are not white. The 'symbolic racism' that appears in the Mail every day is indisputably not the same thing; the Mail (and many of its readers) don't acknowledge the link.

Bails wrote:
Are we going to see a change in the Mail's targets? From worrying their readers about explodey Muslims to telling them all about law breaking black people?

No. It will carry on doing both.


Interesting. I should have phrased that 'offering an Asian man as a role model', as the only reason I knew he that he is Muslim was from the television news. Whether it's mentioned in the article, I couldn't say, because I can't locate its online version.

Re. the Mail being decent towards people of colour, I direct you to Flat Earth News (again), which validates your point:

Quote:
"...black people can, in fact, make it into the paper, providing they fit into a Mail-friendly stereotype." (p372)


The book also refers to the Lawrence case, saying that the Mail was initially going to run a hostile article attacking the groups who wanted a new enquiry. Then Paul Dacre realised that Lawrence's father had done some work on his house a few years earlier, and the order 'Do something sympathetic' came from the news desk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:43 pm
Posts: 4323
Location: 'An English seaport town, principally remarkable for mud, Jews and sailors' – Dickens
Tom_MKUK wrote:
Re. the Mail being decent towards people of colour, I direct you to Flat Earth News (again)

Okay, that's it, I've just reserved the book from the library. (They only have it in large-print version.) You've convinced me it's indispensable!

Quote:
Then Paul Dacre realised that Lawrence's father had done some work on his house a few years earlier, and the order 'Do something sympathetic' came from the news desk.

You … couldn't … make … it … up!

Another way for victims who happen to be minorities to appear sympathetically in the Mail is to give them an exclusive, unpaid interview. Unhappily, many women and/or people of colour are sceptical of the Mail's intentions and resist. They expect the Mail's approval without offering anything in return. How naïve!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:14 pm
Posts: 3168
Today's front page:

Image

At first I was surprised to see a Mail front page covering overseas news, but then I read the subheading and realised it's a stick for some Labour bashing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:15 am 
Offline
I love New Labour
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:04 am
Posts: 277
Location: Indoors
Tom_MKUK wrote:
Today's front page:

Image

At first I was surprised to see a Mail front page covering overseas news, but then I read the subheading and realised it's a stick for some Labour bashing.

What, they should just airbrush 1997 - 2010 from history then? just Labour are now doing. No it's not Labour bashing, its exposing the truth what happened between the Labour party and Libya and that is a good thing.

Surely in a free society you'd want that and you wouldn't want important facts hushed up and swept under the carpet? Sorry but it WAS Labour in power during those times so it's only right their actions were scrutinised.

_________________
Labour is still the shit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 36167
Location: Sunny Surrey where the vines sit smugly in the sunshine.
Why was improving relationships with Libya, and in the process neutralising their support for terrorists which actually did affect us, a bad thing?

Do you ever actually think about the shit you spout?

_________________
To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty. Lao Tzu



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:07 am
Posts: 6334
Location: chesterfield
Why on earth would courts in Libya give a toss about Gaddafi's links to British politicians and members of the royal family? Surely the main focus of any legal proceedings in Libya will be the brutal way in which the Gaddafi regime dealt with it's opponents. Gaddafi would only be questioned about other matters if he was tried by an international court and I think that seems extremely unlikely.

_________________
http://tiny.cc/tqugax


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:49 am 
Offline
I love New Labour
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:04 am
Posts: 277
Location: Indoors
satnav wrote:
Why on earth would courts in Libya give a toss about Gaddafi's links to British politicians and members of the royal family? Surely the main focus of any legal proceedings in Libya will be the brutal way in which the Gaddafi regime dealt with it's opponents. Gaddafi would only be questioned about other matters if he was tried by an international court and I think that seems extremely unlikely.

Well you're not part of a Libyan court so you don't know what their focus will be, but even if there was nothing about links to the UK, it doesn't support your claim that the headline was there to "bash Labour". Even using your logic that there will be nothing from the courts about Britain, the DM can't then bash Labour as there won't be anything to bash them with.

But even if there was, the DM is a right wing paper, so I would expect and want them to bash Labour.

Why does this site bang on about the DM all the time anyway?! Apart from chatter amongst your limited members, your message doesn't go anywhere where it might matter. In fact your message doesn't go anywhere outside of this forum full stop. I mean if you did some kind of protest outside DM HQ maybe someone might listen. But a handful of you just copy/pasting snippets from the DM or their comments, or spotting a comma or apostrophe in the wrong place isn't going to change a thing.

_________________
Labour is still the shit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 36167
Location: Sunny Surrey where the vines sit smugly in the sunshine.
Quote:
Why does this site bang on about the DM all the time anyway?


Well, the clue's in the name. Really.

If you want a longer answer (though I doubt you'll understand it) we believe that of all the daily press the Mail has the most poisonous and insidious political and social 'message', and that its agenda is to the vast detriment of fairness and justice in society.

_________________
To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty. Lao Tzu



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:28 pm
Posts: 478
a bit of balance wrote:
Why does this site bang on about the DM all the time anyway?!


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
"You may have heard the phrase, 'The flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil sets off a tornado in Texas.' Well, try this: 'The lies of a newspaper in London can get a bloke's head caved in down an alley in Bradford.' Richard Peppiatt


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:14 pm
Posts: 3168
a bit of balance wrote:
I mean if you did some kind of protest outside DM HQ maybe someone might listen. But a handful of you just copy/pasting snippets from the DM or their comments, or spotting a comma or apostrophe in the wrong place isn't going to change a thing.


So why does this site bother you so much then?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Fatal: ./cache/ is NOT writable.