Daily Mail Shocker

[SocketRocket]

Are you honestly telling me that what the most influential newspaper in the UK prints; and the way it presents news and the accompanying headlines are not important to anyone. You cannot be serious.

Anyway - don't take my word for it...from prior to the 2015 GE

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...erage-30-cent-said-paper-greatest-impact.html

And you don't need to read a paper to have a view on it. So what's your opinion on the outcome of the Mair trial being reported on p30. An appropriate place in that paper?

I have no opinion on where they post anything as I dont care and if more people took that line it may have an effect on the DM.. Look, you keep saying what a bad newspaper the DM is so why are you surprised at anything it posts and on what page. Joe Cox's death was tragic, I think anyone with any humanity would agree but I am not sure what you are actually suggesting, Is it that the DM is somehow part responsible for her murder?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I have no opinion on where they post anything as I dont care and if more people took that line it may have an effect on the DM.. Look, you keep saying what a bad newspaper the DM is so why are you surprised at anything it posts and on what page. Joe Cox's death was tragic, I think anyone with any humanity would agree but I am not sure what you are actually suggesting, Is it that the DM is somehow part responsible for her murder?

Did I say the DM was a bad newspaper - or did I say it was a very influential paper that twists and prioritises news to support it's own agenda - and influences hugely the thinking of the 23m people who read it.

I am asking you why - of all the 'serious' newspapers - you might think that the DM was the only one that did not have the story on it's front page - and indeed relegated it to p30. Why do you think that was the case?

Could it perhaps be that Paul Dacre realised that the agenda and narrative of the DM in respect of immigration may actually have influenced Mair in his targetting of Jo Cox? And if not then why do you think they did it? I wouldn't dare suggest that some of the 23m DM readers are in any way gullible and susceptible to believing as the truth much of what the DM prints.

The only other reason I can think of is that he didn't deem it particularly important news for his readers - and not worthy of greater prominence.

 

[ger147]

Did I say the DM was a bad newspaper - or did I say it was a very influential paper that twists and prioritises news to support it's own agenda - and influences hugely the thinking of the 23m people who read it.

I am asking you why - of all the 'serious' newspapers - you might think that the DM was the only one that did not have the story on it's front page - and indeed relegated it to p30. Why do you think that was the case?

Could it perhaps be that Paul Dacre realised that the agenda and narrative of the DM in respect of immigration may actually have influenced Mair in his targetting of Jo Cox? And if not then why do you think they did it? I wouldn't dare suggest that some of the 23m DM readers are in any way gullible and susceptible to believing as the truth much of what the DM prints.

The only other reason I can think of is that he didn't deem it particularly important news for his readers - and not worthy of greater prominence.

Where are you getting the figure of 23 million DM readers?

The circulation of the DM is approximately 1.6 million?

 

[bluewolf]

Where are you getting the figure of 23 million DM readers?

The circulation of the DM is approximately 1.6 million?

Circulation and readership are two different numbers. I haven't seen the figures for several years but I'd suspect the readership would be 6-10 million (depending on how you measure readership). 23 milllion may be the number of people who have access to both Print and Online versions.

On another note, does anyone here now dismiss Mair as a madman, or do you agree with the Judge.

 

[ger147]

Circulation and readership are two different numbers. I haven't seen the figures for several years but I'd suspect the readership would be 6-10 million (depending on how you measure readership). 23 milllion may be the number of people who have access to both Print and Online versions.

On another note, does anyone here now dismiss Mair as a madman, or do you agree with the Judge.

These are the figures the Mail are claiming themselves.

http://www.mailclassified.co.uk/advertising-tools/circulation-readership#verticalTab6

 

[bluewolf]

These are the figures the Mail are claiming themselves.

http://www.mailclassified.co.uk/advertising-tools/circulation-readership#verticalTab6

It seems to be claiming a combined readership of just over 7 million (not a bad guess from me &#128521. Does it show the digital hits by any chance. That may explain the 23 million claim.

Edit.. just had a quick look and it looks like approximately 15 million unique users per day. Sort of backs up SILH's claim.

 

[ger147]

It seems to be claiming a combined readership of just over 7 million (not a bad guess from me &#128521. Does it show the digital hits by any chance. That may explain the 23 million claim.

Can't see any there, no.

But as soon as you go online then any and all arguments over their influence they may have over the UK general public goes out of the window as online readers can be from pretty much anywhere on the planet.

 

[bluewolf]

Can't see any there, no.

But as soon as you go online then any and all arguments over their influence they may have over the UK general public goes out of the window as online readers can be from pretty much anywhere on the planet.

Based on what the Mail Online delivers, I wouldn't limit it to this Planet.

 

[ger147]

It seems to be claiming a combined readership of just over 7 million (not a bad guess from me &#128521. Does it show the digital hits by any chance. That may explain the 23 million claim.

Edit.. just had a quick look and it looks like approximately 15 million unique users per day. Sort of backs up SILH's claim.

Pretty big assumption that none of the 7 million readers of the paper click on the website and vice versa.

 

[bluewolf]

Pretty big assumption that none of the 7 million readers of the paper click on the website and vice versa.

It's always going to be a rough metric. I don't know where SILH got his number from though. Based on past experience I'd put the number of unique users of both platforms at around 12-16 million. UK users being about 75% of that figure. Still an eye watering number of people reading some pretty poor journalism (IMO obviously).

 

[ger147]

It's always going to be a rough metric. I don't know where SILH got his number from though. Based on past experience I'd put the number of unique users of both platforms at around 12-16 million. UK users being about 75% of that figure. Still an eye watering number of people reading some pretty poor journalism (IMO obviously).

I'm probably the worst person to comment on newspapers these days as bar the odd copy of my local newspaper (Cumbernauld News), I haven't purchased a newspaper for nearly 20 years and don't use their websites either as I have no time for pretty much all of the mainstream press.

 

[bluewolf]

I'm probably the worst person to comment on newspapers these days as bar the odd copy of my local newspaper (Cumbernauld News), I haven't purchased a newspaper for nearly 20 years and don't use their websites either as I have no time for pretty much all of the mainstream press.

Can't say as I blame you. Very few truly independent news outlets these days. I find it best to read several different angles and then make my own mind up. Not 100% accurate, but at least it makes me think. Good for the tiny grey cells.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I expect the Mail and Express will be going big on this one .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38120596

 

[Farmergeddon]

OK Educate me, Terry Christian spent time on Matthew Wright this morning calling this article racist and divisive.. I have read it (but has he??) all I can see is facts being reported, If people have said what it reports I cannot see anything in it even close to what Christian was going on about.. Possible the "Charge" on the website headline being hi-lited but the article was way down on the site anyway, in the paper its just in small print.. This is typical of leftwing spin on the DM, everything in the paper that is good is ignored and everything else is spun against..

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Where are you getting the figure of 23 million DM readers?

The circulation of the DM is approximately 1.6 million?

Mea Culpa - I read the figure incorrectly. The 23m is the number who read DM print and on-line in a month

 

[Hacker Khan]

OK Educate me, Terry Christian spent time on Matthew Wright this morning calling this article racist and divisive.. I have read it (but has he??) all I can see is facts being reported, If people have said what it reports I cannot see anything in it even close to what Christian was going on about.. Possible the "Charge" on the website headline being hi-lited but the article was way down on the site anyway, in the paper its just in small print.. This is typical of leftwing spin on the DM, everything in the paper that is good is ignored and everything else is spun against..

That's shocking!!!


That you actually watch the Matthew Wright show

 

[Doon frae Troon]

That's shocking!!!


That you actually watch the Matthew Wright show

Who is Mathew Wright ?

 

[IanM]

I expect the Mail and Express will be going big on this one .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38120596

Depends on who did it.... if the perps are White Skin Heads, the Guardian, Mirror will be all over it!

If they are Muslims, the converse will apply. The Mail and Express will go large and the Guardian/Mirror and BBC will blame a Norwegian!

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Nothing like the truthhttp://wingsoverscotland.com/the-ratio-of-truth/

 

[Hobbit]

Nothing like the truthhttp://wingsoverscotland.com/the-ratio-of-truth/

Tbh Doon, when I read the original article I thought it was a load of rubbish. I've been signing staff expenses for donkeys years. X many weeks hotels or apartments plus meals and travelling... I couldn't see much wrong with the spending, and it was obviously a dig at a party that doesn't fit the Mail's political bias.