Daily Mail

It is a UK newspaper which has a reputation of being right wing and inaccurate to the point of being propoganda. It is worth noting that they have two versions: a print version and an online version, and they are different publications (though they share a lot of the same stories). The headlines and stories in both, however, are designed to sell. Clickbait, essentially. One of the most notorious incidents of misreporting by the Daily Mail was one of their anti-immigrant stories. They stated that an immigrant was not deported because he owned a cat . The story has been thoroughly debunked as false . By several good sources , but that didn't prevent the DM from repeating the story and claiming it was correct all along . It is difficult to view this as anything other than deliberately misrepresenting the facts in order to give a view that the immigrant was allowed to stay due to an outrageous decision by the court. The Daily Mail is heavily anti-immigrant, and always has been. In the 1930s, it protested about Jewish asylum seekers coming from Germany . It openly supported the Fascists in Britain and Adolf Hitler. That's in the past, isn't it, though? Well, that didn't stop the DM from criticising a British politician for the actions of his father during World War 2. The problem (apart from the criticism being aimed at the man's father) was that the allegations weren't actually true anyway . But Mr Milliband was very senior in the Labour Party, who are left wing. It was a hit piece, pure and simple. But wait: there's more. The DM love cancer. Or rather, they love stories about cancer, and things which cause it or cure it. And they are not particularly careful in their reporting. They just spit out published studies as if they are proof. This has led to a website called " Kill or Cure " which lists (and references) DM stories about things and tells you whether the DM claims that the thing causes cancer, cures cancer, or both. The DM likes to run stories which are anti-immigrant, anti-Gypsy, anti-working class and so forth. They dislike a lot of groups of people, and are not afraid to misrepresent stories (such as the cat) or just make them up (like the Ralph Milliband one). They were also obsessed with Princess Diana for years after her death, and openly published conspiracy theories . The online version is famous for the photos of scantily-clad girls which they publish with delight. And I mean girls, not women. I'm not going to look for examples, but if you google "sidebar of shame" or search for "all grown up" on the Mail website, you should find plenty of photos of girls of various ages. Sometimes, the attitude of the Daily Mail has unfortunate consequences, such as the suicide of a transgender woman who committed suicide after her treatment by the paper. The coronor singled out the Daily Mail for criticism in that affair. "Having carried out what can only be described as a character assassination, having sought to ridicule and humiliate Lucy Meadows and bring into question her right to pursue her career as a teacher, the Daily Mail's response was to offer to remove the article from the website," he said, adding: "It seems to me that nothing has been learned from the Leveson inquiry [a UK government enquiry into the ethics of the British press]." The Daily Mail sell a lot of copies: so there must be people who believe them. But in general, I find that people who don't read the DM will assume that anything reported by them is false unless other, more reputable sources, also publish the same story. Those on the right who want accurate reporting will read "The Daily Telegraph" or "The Times", rather than the DM. I will leave you with the Daily Mail Headline Generator so you can make your own Daily Mail headlines. It's a bit out of date now, and it should include "Romanians", "Bulgarians", and "Muslims" to be more accurate, but it'll give you an idea. So yeah: in short, the Daily Mail is, for good reason, widely seen as a sensationalist and largely inaccurate publication with very heavy biases. Very few people in the UK would treat it as a trusted source in regard to any story whatsoever. EDIT 6th Dec 2015; this got linked to from a busy r/wtf thread. Welcome, new readers. u/Weedlefruit posted a video below which is well worth watching. The intro is a bit slow and lasts for about 4 mins 45 seconds. Don't be afraid to skip it. The talk is funny and does a good analysis of the Daily Mail, and some of their more shady habits. It did indeed inspire some of the points I made (I saw it some time ago). More on reddit.com

Not remotely. They are a tabloid. Even when their stories are factually correct the details are often blown out of proportion or presented in the most sensationalistic way possible.

More on reddit.com

They put a shittonne of spin on everything, so any facts that go into the Mail come out as a load of bias that usually blames immigrants.

More on reddit.com

This page has a pretty good run down on why The Daily Mail is hated sometimes more than other tabloids. Because it's literally the king of shitrags atop a pile of shitrag lords.

They're harrassive, frequently racist, frequently lying, and have been successfully sued for libel 7 times.

Here's some more shit

They also outed a transgender teacher's gender transition on a national scale, which lead to her (Lucy Meadows) committing suicide.

I don't feel like looking all day, it's really easy to find examples of how despicable and disreputable they are.

More on reddit.com