Dailymail gone too far again? Article by 'Richard Littlejohn' could possibly have contributed to sui
41 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sir M;39999757]Atleast the sun has boobs to cheer you up, the daily mail spends half the time yelling how existing gives you cancer[/QUOTE]
Relevant:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTu7GLfrmUI[/media]
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;39999674]That would be the Sun. The Daily Mail has more class.[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9dqNTTdYKY[/media]
At least The Cun doesn't encourage its readership to wank to underage girls
The Daily Mail has always gone to far. This is the tank that broke the camels back really.
Further development on the story
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/22/lucy-meadows-press-harassment[/url]
They actually put up a 'proper' news story about this sometime today where the comments were disabled for 'legal reasons'. However, I'm probably being blind but they've since removed the second article.
[QUOTE=butt2089;40000969]You guys are acting as if any newspapers are trustworthy - not a single one is.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, are you saying that the Daily Mail isn't an extreme outlier of pure malevolence?
I fucking swear to god, the only way you could make a publication as [I]evil[/I] as the daily mail is to have it shat out by [I]the devil himself[/I].
" Richard Littlejohn " .... as in " Dick Little John "
Oh my.
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;40004702]Sorry, are you saying that the Daily Mail isn't an extreme outlier of pure malevolence?
I fucking swear to god, the only way you could make a publication as [I]evil[/I] as the daily mail is to have it shat out by [I]the devil himself[/I].[/QUOTE]
No, that's not what I'm saying at all
FP always launches such a huge attack on the Daily Mail when, even though I'm not refuting that the Daily Mail has dodgy articles, other publications are equally as suspect - especially broad sheets.
[editline]a[/editline]
I just find it strange that the Daily Mail seems to be more of a story than the fact that a teacher committed suicide
one of the top google image results for richard littlejohn, just so you get the full picture:
[img]http://s1.b3ta.com/host/creative/78614/1277366712/HEYHEY.gif[/img]
[editline]23rd March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=butt2089;40005818]No, that's not what I'm saying at all
FP always launches such a huge attack on the Daily Mail when, even though I'm not refuting that the Daily Mail has dodgy articles, other publications are equally as suspect - especially broad sheets.[/QUOTE]
no, broadsheets are demonstrably less shite than tabloids, that's just common knowledge
[quote]no, broadsheets are demonstrably less shite than tabloids, that's just common knowledge[/QUOTE]
Less shite in terms of the articles that they put publish and the quality of writing, but in accuracy - not so much, anything you could find in the Daily Mail you could find in any broadsheet but just less overtly
[quote]Less shite in terms of the articles that they put publish and the quality of writing[/quote]
so in every subjective quality then?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
