Bloody Daily Mail

I’ve just been scouring the Blogosphere, as usual and I came across a post by Martin Belam talking about a comment he posted on the Daily Mail website.

Basically his comment was cut by the Daily Mail so that his critisism wasn’t included, they removed the last line of his comment and in turn changed the meaning of the comment AND made his grammar look almost worse than mine.

He submitted this:
If you actually read the report ChildLine issued, it does not say that suicidal five year olds called ChildLine. It says that there were 42 phone calls by children between the ages of 5 AND 11. The other 96% of suicidal calls were by children 12 and over - which whilst it is still very sad is nowhere near the picture of suicidal 5 year olds portrayed in this article.

They published this:
If you actually read the report ChildLine issued, it does not say that suicidal five year olds called ChildLine. It says that there were 42 phone calls by children between the ages of 5 AND 11. The other 96% of suicidal calls were by children 12 and over - which whilst it is still very sad.

This is a bloody annoying thing - it’s better for a publisher to not publish/delete a comment than edit it to remove critisism/change it’s meaning. I’ve only ever commented on Daily Mail stories twice and neither of those times has my comment been included.

It comes to something when a ‘newspaper’ can’t take any form of constructive critisism. This is a real shame as, despite their bloody awful journalism, they do have one of the better British newspaper sites.

Reading Blogs

While on the subject of scouring the blogosphere I have a Creme Egg question for you “how do you read yours?”. I go around blogs in two ways.

First I go to my blogroll and read all the blogs I personally link to then I go to my own My Blog Log page and go through the blogs that I am friends with and then the blogs of people visiting the blogs I’m friends with down about two levels.

But how do you read yours?

Sphere: Related Content

Share This