> and much of society at large ignored the nonsense from The Daily Mail.
Isn't it one of the most sold newspapers in the UK? I like how elitist folks are. In Romania everyone I know would also go "no one buys Libertatea" (one of our trashy newspapers) but it is the most sold newspaper in Romania.
High brow people badly underestimate how much influence these tabloids have. There's a reason their readers made folks like Kim Kardashian a billionaire.
Also newspapers stirring things does sometimes muck up politics. Like in the 30s the Mail used to support Hitler and Mussolini who then went on to cause some bother.
Sure, but that doesn't mean these particular articles were also widely shared or read.
I think this is confusing the general ("Daily Mail is the most read paper in the UK") with the specific ("this article was shared, linked, and read a lot").
Yes, many media outlets are sensationalist, have a poor record of journalistic integrety, yet their product is consumed by millions of people. That doesn't make them a good source; it makes them a liability.
It is high brow left wing types in particular that delude themselves about the oddness of their own beliefs. The Daily Mail becomes a special object of hate because it is a reminder that they are - at least politically - very strange.
Isn't it one of the most sold newspapers in the UK? I like how elitist folks are. In Romania everyone I know would also go "no one buys Libertatea" (one of our trashy newspapers) but it is the most sold newspaper in Romania.
High brow people badly underestimate how much influence these tabloids have. There's a reason their readers made folks like Kim Kardashian a billionaire.