NML is fighting back against misrepresentation in the Daily Mail. I think we can draw 3 things from this story:
1.) Tabloids (and same goes for women's magazines) have their own agenda. They'll write the story they want, and slot your name in wherever it suits them. Be very, very careful if they should ever contact you.
2.) Don't talk to the Daily Mail.
3.) Don't ever ever ever talk to the Daily Mail.
About horses
1 day ago
8 comments:
Sometimes you don't even have to talk to the Daily Mail for them to quote you.
Unfortunate fact.
The Daily Mail never quotes me. I've left comments loads and they never publish them. Just because I don't agree with them. idiots.
Thank your writing this post. I am repeating all of these things to myself! To be honest, it seems like it didn't matter what I said, they were slotting me in that story!
Anyone who actually believes what's in the Daily Mail isn't someone whose opinion actually matters though, is it?
They did a hatchet job on Kevin Greening. The mild mannered Radio 1 DJ who was a lovely genuine bloke, who had the misfortune, in their eyes, to be a) gay and b) a recreational drugs user.
The Daily Mail are hateful horrible people. And you can quote me on that.
The Mail are the scum of the earth. I doubt the journalist even looked at NML's blog.
I had the same kind of thing (not nearly as bad) with the Times when they wrote an article suggesting that I was suicidal in real life (as the real me blogged about here) and needed counselling - just because I'd deactivated my Facebook account for a couple of weeks!
The next thing I knew I was being invited on to a live interview with Fox News about my supposed 'Facebook suicide'. (See here for my withering put-down, oh yes.
These newspapers are evil and will wilfully overlook or ignore anything factual in favour of the story they want to tell. It makes you wonder how much accuracy there is in *anything* you read in the media...
Tabloids are tabloids, but The Daily Mail is a special brand of ugly. I was properly sickened when I heard an Irish edition was coming out - I rather naively thought we didn't have that demographic over here.
B, right, I'm sure that goes on too. Though maybe easier to prove than that they've totally misrepresented you.
Count yourself lucky Billy.
Del, good point. Though I don't really understand them, why do they insist on basically lying about human interest stories? What purpose does it serve?
Patroclus, good lord! I entirely missed all that. I love the exquisite politeness of your response.
You're so right - at least blogs make no claim to present an unbiased objective report of the truth. Though possibly they do more than most newspapers.
Emordino, what a shame, Ireland managed to resist them this long. I'm never sure about that 'giving people what they want' argument when the people who own the papers have such naked political agendas.
NML, I've had that experience, and on something much less personal too. Hang in there, I think it's great that you are not letting it go.
Post a Comment