Thursday, March 12, 2009

Does the Daily Mail believe in freedom?

The only paper who ever supported Oswald Mosley and the Third Reich in the 1930s lectures the nation about Oswald Mosley.

The Daily Mail are doing what they do best. They're secreting spite. Paul Dacre & chums didn't like the recent statements by Gerry McCann and Max Mosley before the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee as part of their investigation into "press standards, privacy and libel".

Naive though he may have been, Mr McCann was spot on when he accused several British papers of "treating [his daughter] Madeleine as a commodity". "We saw pressure particularly on journalists to produce stories when really there was nothing much to report", he added.

Similarly, FIA boss Max Mosley told the Committee about his own encounter with the media jackals. He said that "the ordeal" left him out of pocket and caused irreparable damage to his reputation and suggested that "editors should be required to give people advance warning before publishing private information about them so they have time to seek an injunction to block the story". Yes, the dirty old man may have enjoyed kinky sex with prostitutes but what business is it of the tabloids to do a peeping Tom and fake moral outrage?

Well, no. The Daily Mail doesn't enjoy being told off. The way they see it, they should be free to spurt whatever they like, whether true or half true, false or distorted, public or private, and who gives a toss about the victims' reputation. This way they've ruined lives for years, accusing innocent people of murder or making stuff up about people's political sympathies, sexual habits or alleged alcohol or drug addiction. This, for the Mail, is 'freedom of speech'.

So when Paul Dacre ordered one of his sub-editors to go for the jugular against Max Mosley, the result was a pathetic piece by Stephen Glover.

Oh if only the Mail could do irony. For what else can you think when you read the accusations that Mosley wants to "sweep everything under the carpet, mislead the public and [not] tell the truth" coming from the paper that tops the league of complaints received for falsehood and distortion?

Or what about Glover's rants against Mr Mosely's father, "the 1930s British fascist leader Oswald", complete with a hitleresque black and white photo and the caption "Oswald Mosley gives a hate-filled speech as leader of the British Union of Fascists"? Glover even adds that "the son, like his father, does not believe in freedom".

Except that the only British paper who staunchly supported Oswald Mosley, the fascists and the Third Reich throughout the 1930s was, of course, the Daily Mail. Absolutely hilarious.

[More here about the Daily Mail and Adolf Hitler in the 1930s]

2 comments:

Richard T said...

On the very rare occasions when I put on a pair of heavy duty disposable gloves and read the Mail, the impression I get is one of the sort of news and commentary that was prevalent across Europe in the 1920's and 30's. The distortion of factual information, the demonisation of groups (immigrants, gays, young people), the super patriotism, the vindictiveness when challenged and the injured innocence when caught. I cannot but see the Mail as reverting to its origins.

Anita said...

I'd say the Mail is a total joke if it wasn't for the fact that millions of people take its word like the Bible.

Richard T is right. Their constant demonisation of groups and their vindictiveness make it a toxic bunch.