- Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:15 pm #502321
There's such a massive awareness online of how evil the Daily Mail is and how it constantly lies (including claims of interviewing people and using quotes when they didn't even contact them) sensationalises and takes things out of context, and it is all of course justified, but I can't understand how despite this the paper remains so influential. I suppose most of their readers must be 50+ and not particularly online much. Although there are a lot of people my age that I have seen reading the online site at school etc for their fantastic hard-hitting celebrity pieces which are mostly photos and three lines of text, so I suppose they have some influence there with the celebrity distractions. Maybe the constant furore and outrage actually continues to make them popular and well-read? I don't know.