The Mail vs Facebook

Fflaps · **Posted:** Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:59 pm

Carter-Ruck?

Mailydail · **Posted:** Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:12 pm

Bet they won't sue and the Mail gets away with it.

bluebellnutter · **Posted:** Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:21 pm

Malcolm Armsteen wrote:

Amongst so many other things the Mail doesn't understand the First Rule of Holes.

And "holes" is a word I use frequently to describe people on the DM website. Usually proceeded by another, altogether less wholesome word

Killer Whale · **Posted:** Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:27 pm

Jeremy · **Joined:** Sun Oct 07, 2007 10:37 am **Posts:** 426

Fozzy wrote:

I'd have thought Williams-Thomas has a good claim against the Mail, if he finds an enterprising no win no fee libel lawyer: they've effectively portrayed him as someone who lied about the website he went onto, and an idiot as well.

To be fair, he does seem to be an idiot. A misrepresented idiot, but an idiot.

tc-obo · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:31 am

Well, in fairness, there are some websites where it would be pretty easy to prey on people, particularly as they allow you to interact with literally anyone on the site fairly easily and they are targeted at a teenage demographic. But they're not necessarily the most well-known social networking sites.

moonshien · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:10 pm

Fozzy wrote:

I'd have thought Williams-Thomas has a good claim against the Mail, if he finds an enterprising no win no fee libel lawyer: they've effectively portrayed him as someone who lied about the website he went onto, and an idiot as well.

It turns put he didn't even write the article, makes you wonder why he agreed to put his name to it in that case

Quote:

I contacted Mr Williams-Thomas to check a few facts, and he confirmed that the story had indeed been "ghosted" by a Mail reporter. He says he got back to the paper with a number of changes before publication, but although they acknowledged receipt of his alterations, they were not acted on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/rorycellanjones/2010/03/facebook_v_daily_mail.html

ManicMiner · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:34 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ebook.html

Wow.

No comments allowed :lol:

Fflaps · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:36 pm

The Beeb and Facebook - together at last. Dacre must have been creaming himself.

I'm really surprised the Mail is daring to mention Facebook at all (and this course isn't about facebook, it's about using the web, which a lot of people, especially older people, lack confidence with) after the events of the last few days.

Malcolm Armsteen · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:37 pm

Well maybe the Mail would do well to send its journalists on courses on how to use Facebook, or any of the new media.

Just seen that Rentokil has a Twitter Use strategy - seems sensible in a neo-capitalist way. I don't imagine their shareholders are revolting. Or more revolting than most capitalist bourgeois running dogs.

Fozzy · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:42 pm

There must be an opportunity for lots of sarky comments about whether the Mail is actually talking about Facebook or other social networking websites, and shouldn't they be glad that the Beeb are getting their staff to use it so they'll all die of cancer and there'll be no Beeb left to charge a licence fee for.

Timbo · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:42 pm

Either way, I very much doubt this will be helping the Mail's thin hope that they don't get sued for their recent stunt!

The events of the next few weeks do seem to hinge largely on whether or not FB feel like a fight. I also noticed with interest they have asked for a clarification as to why their five attempts to post a comment on the story didn't get through - maybe this will shed some light on the murky world of comment moderation at the DM/

liberalharpie · **Posted:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:16 pm

ManicMiner wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1257487/BBC-lavishes-thousands-pounds-teaching-staff-use-Facebook.html

Wow.

No comments allowed :lol:

My comment was:

"Maybe the Daily Mail reporters should have lessons."

I can't imagine why it never got through.

aljardi · **Posted:** Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:49 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... l#comments

Facebook 'sex encounters' linked to rise in syphilis

The comments are quality.

ManicMiner · **Posted:** Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:08 pm

Quote:

This is one of the funniest and most absurd stories I've ever read! For quite some while the Daily Mail has had a very obvious anti-Facebook crusade, but this story is a classic. I don't blame the anonymous 'Daily Mail Reporter' for not putting their name to this.

- Elen Jonas, Cardiff, 24/3/2010 13:17

Quote:

Facebook not only gives you cancer (according to the Mail), but now it gives you syphillis as well? OMG!!!! (as they say online)

I'm on Facebook - I'm dreading my slow lingering death, scratching myself like a cat at the front door wanting fed.. I have ordered my coffin already and I'm only 37!!!

Seriously - what is the Mail's problem with Facebook? Why are no other social networks like Bebo and MySpace given such frankly ludicrous attention?

MySpace has plenty of randy ne'er do wells on it too - why do you never spread dumb stories about it? Ah, that'll be because it's owned by Rupert Murdoch, and you don't want to start a war with the Sun from where you lift much of your copy about Cheryl Cole. The "Omerta" between poor tabloid journalists eh?

I hope Facebook sue you and take you to the cleaners. You're obsessed!

Tabloid Watch and Angry Mob blogs for the WIN!!!

- Scott Mitchell, Paisley, Scotland, 24/3/2010 12:28

The Mail vs Facebook

Who is online