Satan, thy name is Paul Dacre

Depressing news in the Guardian today. The Daily Mail could be on target to become the UK’s top selling daily newspaper. It’s already the paper of choice for Britain’s terrified, ageing middle class and, according to predicted sales figures, could be on its way to bashing the once-untouchable, super soaraway Sun in the bitter circulation wars. Not that I’ll be shedding any tears for Murdoch’s red top you understand, but I think in the greater scheme of things, his tacky tabloid is nowhere near as malevolent as the Daily Mail: hate and fear spurts from every page of this vile shit rag, feverishly gripped in a permanent state of outrage about, well, everything.

The cunning tactic has been to combine their infamous right-wing, fear mongering journalism with an endless stream of celebrity obsessed piffle. A sort of cross between Mein Kampf and Now magazine. So instead of just reading news items about single mums / benefit cheats / teenage abortion / dwindling church numbers / illegal immigrants and the endless influx of darkies and gypsies, etc., readers are also now “treated” to features on the size of Abi Titmuss’s arse; the colour of Coleen McLoughlin’s socks; Kerry Whatsername’s new tits or how many cheeseburgers Britney Spears ate yesterday.

And if all this weren’t bad enough, the Mail last week dug deep into its big pockets to lure back the “talent” of its prodigal son – Richard Littlejohn. Ah, bless, he’s returning to his spiritual home. The mouthpiece for Middle England bigotry himself. The man who sees no irony in writing endless tirades berating the erosion of British society from the comfort of his home in. . . . Florida. To repeat his hackneyed phrase: “You couldn’t make it up!”. (Except he does, of course. Frequently.)

So there you have it. The Daily Mail: newspaper of our times. The one that captures the zeitgeist. Probably even fancies itself as the paper of record. It’s enough to make you puke.


Centrist. Atlanticist. Dry liberal. Anti-totalitarian. Post-ideological pragmatist. Child of The Enlightenment. Toucan.

Tagged with:
Posted in Uncategorized
3 comments on “Satan, thy name is Paul Dacre
  1. Anonymous says:

    Hyprocritical though it may be, The Daily Mail sells because it represents a section of the population who are so arrogantly dismissed by, funnily enough, the Liberal Elite of this country.

    The sooner the likes of The Guardian et al realise that expressing concerns about immigration is not racist, criticising the EU in its current form is not xenophobic, wanting lower taxes does not represent greed (I could go on), then this part of society will continue to find a voice through what I admit is a publication that on a daily basis, aims to shock.

    Don’t dismiss them, listen to them, and respond in turn. See where they’re coming from. Is Britain *really* full of so many spitting images of The Daily Mail?

  2. sparx says:

    Expressing an opinion on potentially controversial issues is one thing. Shit-stirring, exaggerating and printing downright bollocks to get people without the brains to think for themselves terrified is another, very Daily Mail thing.

    I detest the Daily Mail, not for it’s political views but for the way it puts them across. A pox on this bigot-ridden pile of utter shite. It is one paper that would fit right into a totalitarianist society and if it’s the biggest selling paper in the country then I for one, am just a little bit scared.

  3. Citizen Sane says:

    I think Sparx has hit the nail on the head: it’s not the opinions or the arguments it puts forward, it’s the way that it is done. Expressing concerns about immigration is not necessarily racist, for example. But running hysterical stories about an influx of HIV-infected gypsies is. The Daily Mail deliberately plays on the fear, prejudice, base instincts and (small c) conservatism of the British public.

    There’s a story of a Daily Mail exec once describing its readers as ‘cunts’, and virtually admitting that the paper churns out their shit with nothing but contempt for their own audience. May well be apocryphal, and I cannot locate the source. Anyone know it?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Citizen Sane
Citizen Sane

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,305 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: