Why I hate the Daily Mail

[hairy]

They rave about the peril of sunbeds... then let us fry our brains on cannabis.

Peter Hitchens is a clueless idiot.

What a pile of shit. The only reason I posted this is because there's many people who will read that and believe every word. And they wonder why they're losing the war on drugs.

Its a long article to read if you hate it. Why not just dont bother? I couldn't be arsed but then again I've fried my brain too many times.

[James.]

They rave about the peril of sunbeds... then let us fry our brains on cannabis.

Peter Hitchens is a clueless idiot.

What a pile of shit. The only reason I posted this is because there's many people who will read that and believe every word. The irony being that views like his only worsen the situation. When will someone in government have the balls to step up, tell this twat he's talking bollocks and push the debate into new ground (i.e. serious, contructive debate about legislation - and not just cannabis).

[Granno]

You really do hate it mate!

[James.]

Sorry everyone.

Bloody hell. My PC is having a shocker.

Just forget I said anything!

[welck12]

Wow good to see that daily mail coloumists know how to research their work adn find out the facts as oppose to just spouting shit

[James.]

In answer to hairy's comment. I don't just read things I enjoy reading. If you don't know what's wrong, how can you make it right?

[Dr The Singh]

In answer to hairy's comment. I don't just read things I enjoy reading. If you don't know what's wrong, how can you make it right?

Read top shelf material, it's always right!!!

[Webbo]

They rave about the peril of sunbeds... then let us fry our brains on cannabis.

Peter Hitchens is a clueless idiot.

What a pile of shit. The only reason I posted this is because there's many people who will read that and believe every word. The irony being that views like his only worsen the situation. When will someone in government have the balls to step up, tell this twat he's talking bollocks and push the debate into new ground (i.e. serious, contructive debate about legislation - and not just cannabis).

Perhaps if you could explain what it is you disagree with we could debate what you mean.

[Flynny]

As much as that was awful ("lying" about medicinal benefits? what?) my favourite part was "Our driving test is now so easy that a well-drilled wombat could pass it,". He's had to stick to the line that everything was better in the olden days despite the driving test getting more and more difficult.

[James.]

Perhaps if you could explain what it is you disagree with we could debate what you mean.

The whole article.

I would never deny that cannabis can't have an impact on mental health. I've seen the effect in friends. But articles like this serve no purpose whatsoever in addressing the problem. In fact it is people like Hitchens that prevent the debate moving forward through melodramatic misinformation.

[Webbo]

The whole article.

I would never deny that cannabis can't have an impact on mental health. I've seen the effect in friends. But articles like this serve no purpose whatsoever in addressing the problem. In fact it is people like Hitchens that prevent the debate moving forward through melodramatic misinformation.

I think the point of the article is 'why does the govt ban some things that are bad for you while softening the law on other things that are bad for you'.

As for preventing the debate from moving, Peter Hitchens doesn't have any power to prevent anything.Anyway surely in a debate somebody has to put the opposite point of view.

[James.]

I think the point of the article is 'why does the govt ban some things that are bad for you while softening the law on other things that are bad for you'.

The point of the article is a rant about cannabis that has no basis in fact. He can disguise it as a comparison with sunbeds or whatever but his intentions seem pretty clear to me. It's pointless, counter-productive and it makes me angry.

Anyway, I should chill out a bit. I might go and have a smoke.

[Webbo]

The point of the article is a rant about cannabis that has no basis in fact. He can disguise it as a comparison with sunbeds or whatever but his intentions seem pretty clear to me. It's pointless, counter-productive and it makes me angry.

Anyway, I should chill out a bit. I might go and have a smoke.

But you've already admitted that cannabis can affect mental health.

Anyway, it's a coloumists job to be controversial. I read Peter Hitchens coloumn every week in the MOS, I do enjoy it but I must admit he's a bit of a silly old fart at times.

[James.]

But you've already admitted that cannabis can affect mental health.

Yes, but that's not the same as saying:

Anyone who knows anything about the subject realises that cannabis is among the most dangerous drugs in existence, laying waste to young minds and rotting any society where it takes hold.

[Webbo]

Yes, but that's not the same as saying:

It's what's known as dramatic license,nothing to get excited about.

As for the MOS if you go over the page from Peter Hitchens there's a women who gives a left of centre viewpoint (not that the liberalisation of drugs is a left/right issue).

[James.]

It's what's known as dramatic license,nothing to get excited about.

I'm not convinced everyone who reads the Daily Mail has the same ability to distinguish journalistic techniques as you do. The reason I posted this article was because I personally believe one of the biggest obstacles to moving a debate like this forward is because too many people DO believe exactly what he says. It reinforces the misinformation and he should be ashamed to right such nonsense.

[davieG]

I'm not convinced everyone who reads the Daily Mail has the same ability to distinguish journalistic techniques as you do. The reason I posted this article was because I personally believe one of the biggest obstacles to moving a debate like this forward is because too many people DO believe exactly what he says. It reinforces the misinformation and he should be ashamed to right such nonsense.

This exaggeration is done by all newspapers let, right, comic book and porn versions.

[Bellend Sebastian]

What's their latest position on the MMR vaccine?

Evil, evil cretins

[Hullfox]

The whole article.

I would never deny that cannabis can't have an impact on mental health. I've seen the effect in friends. But articles like this serve no purpose whatsoever in addressing the problem. In fact it is people like Hitchens that prevent the debate moving forward through melodramatic misinformation.

Is the debate not moving forward at all by it being discussed on here?

[skinnydipper]

[Guest Bilo]

That's bloody hard to read quickly enough. Can we restart the Daily Mail headline generator now?

[James.]

Is the debate not moving forward at all by it being discussed on here?

Well the debate on the mertis of the media and the Daily Mail has moved forward but I don't see any movement regarding the debate on drug policy... Basically people who don't like the Hitchens article will dismiss it as nonsense while the supporters of the article will nod their heads and tut at the "moral decay". It's a divisive article but not one that will lead to any debate, as shown in this thread.

[Hullfox]

Well the debate on the mertis of the media and the Daily Mail has moved forward but I don't see any movement regarding the debate on drug policy... Basically people who don't like the Hitchens article will dismiss it as nonsense while the supporters of the article will nod their heads and tut at the "moral decay". It's a divisive article but not one that will lead to any debate, as shown in this thread.

In which case maybe I should have said the article gives an opportunity to move the debate forward should people wish it to do so.

Hitchen and his ilk need to sell papers and keep readers interested - he does that "well" but in the main he and his ilk have to fall heavily on one side of the fence to be able to provoke reaction.

[Jon the Hat]

Drugs are a problem, but they needn't be a criminal problem. Move them into the healthcare problem bucket with Alchohol and smoking and everyone is better off.

[Fosse Boy]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1275524/500-term-payout-students-forced-wake-early.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

This is how they've been reporting a minor news story in my ends.

Firstly, "£500 a term"? It's actually just a one off payment this term and equates to about 6 weeks worth of rent.

"Local residents angry"? Absolute bollocks. It doesn't affect any local residents as there are no houses within about a mile of the university campus. Blatant fiction.

"People having lie ins"? Yeah, some probably do. Our library is open 24 hours because it's recognised that different people work better at different times of day. I personally work better during the day so I get up (relatively) early, but some people work better on a nocturnal schedule.

As someone who has classes fairly close to where the building work's going on, I can vouch for the fact that it's fucking difficult to concentrate on your studies while it's going on. The Mail is just bitter because a Students' Union (of whom I'musually highly critical by the way) at a university with a left wing reputation has managed to actually achieve something for the people they represent. To be fair I expect nothing less than the shitarse reporting found in this article from them.

Cunts.