Remove The Daily Mail from VTDC

[Sugaree]

The recent surge in the use of The Daily Mail as a "reliable" source in the Daily Chronicle is troubling. We should all know by now that The Daily Mail is a publication that looks to pass its own agenda. They sensationalize stories to be more than they are, are amazingly biased, and have been implicated in editorial scandals. I suggest we ban The Daily Mail to be used as a source for news stories and implement a list of better publications.

[Cognizant]

The recent surge in the use of The Daily Mail as a "reliable" source in the Daily Chronicle is troubling. We should all know by now that The Daily Mail is a publication that looks to pass its own agenda. They sensationalize stories to be more than they are, are amazingly biased, and have been implicated in editorial scandals. I suggest we ban The Daily Mail to be used as a source for news stories and implement a list of better publications.

I don't see a problem with people using The Daily Mail... let people believe what they want to believe.

[SosbanFach]

The recent surge in the use of The Daily Mail as a "reliable" source in the Daily Chronicle is troubling. We should all know by now that The Daily Mail is a publication that looks to pass its own agenda. They sensationalize stories to be more than they are, are amazingly biased, and have been implicated in editorial scandals. I suggest we ban The Daily Mail to be used as a source for news stories and implement a list of better publications.

While I am absolutely in agreement with your analysis of the Daily Mail in terms of levels of bias, and its sensationalist outlook, I don't think that it would be reasonable to 'ban' it from the Daily Chronicle. It is still regrettably a fairly well known publication, with a significant number of readers, and one which some people still believe to be in some way 'reputable'. Furthermore, were VT to ban the Mail as a source, the more right-wing of its members would without a doubt argue that the Guardian, or the BBC (both undeniably not without a certain degree of left wing bias) ought also to be banned, although personally I would not consider those examples comparable. Possibly most importantly, banning of such publications on a global level, for example, would be considered a breach of freedom of the press and of expression, my point being that while it may be nonsense, it is nonsense that certain people like to believe and consume - if its ban would represent such a breach on an international perspective, why should it be different on a site which, after all, is in general so supportive of these freedoms, and has such a diverse range of opinions?

[Bath]

As it's been said above, we are not going to ban any news source. There are various news sources that try and skew the news, unfortunately that's common in media journalism. The VT Daily Chronicle is for people to share relevant news in different topics, and the source is up to them. If a member would want to look up more on the topic, then they're free to do so. Or, if they feel the information shared is wrong, they can post correcting. It's all about discussing and sharing, and no way are we going to censor any source.

[ImCoolBeans]

You can say the same about an innumerable amount of "news" sources. I don't think there is a reason to ban it from TDC, nor do I support the idea that it should. As must as I dislike The Daily Mail and wouldn't waste my time looking through their site, I just don't see why it needs to be discredited when some people may agree with them and in fact enjoy their articles. I hate Fox news; but I'm not about to go discredit them and say that we should ban the use of their articles on VT because I think they are an extremely one-sided, biased corporation who does nothing but spew BS around. Everybody is entitled to their own opinions - if you dislike The Daily Mail then simply don't read their articles when they get posted.

[CaptainObvious]

there's no news organization on the planet without a bias on one level or another. railing against and suggesting the banning of an entire news source on that basis is a little bit ridiculous and says a lot more about the point of view of the person suggesting it than the news organization.

[TheMatrix]

"I remember the newspapers dying like moths. No one wanted them back. No one missed them. And the Government, seeing how advantageous it was to have people reading only about passionate lips and the fist in the stomach, circled the situation with your fire-eaters." -- Faber, in Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury.
Banning a news source is like burning books. It's censorship, and to a certain degree, downright Communist.

Well, okay, maybe it's not that bad, but you should take everything on the internet with a grain of salt. If you don't like it, nobody's forcing you to read it.

[Jackerlus]

The founder of the daily mail went to my school, our sports center is name after him :P Even with it being a scumbag of a newspaper, it shouldn't be censored. That would be stopping freedom of speech.

[HunterSteele]

Does this mean I can post articles from the Onion?

[UnknownError]

i like the daily mail they post about lindsay lohan and amanda bynes.

[Bath]

Does this mean I can post articles from the Onion?

No because it's a parody news source. That would belong more in TWPR.

[TigerBoy]

More lies from the Daily Fail costing them a payout here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19803213) - anyone who uses just one media source is never going to get the whole truth, but the evidence continues to convince me that Daily Mail readers are fed more outright lies and bigotry than most.

Should VT censor it? No, I don't think so. But I for one don't take anything they say seriously.

[Infidelitas]

I think that you cant take anything a news service says for a grain of salt. It doesn't mean that you cant gain awareness of a situation from it.
All readers need to make their own decisions when it comes to news sources.

[DerBear]

I will admit the daily mail is a joke when it comes to giving you the truth of the news. Yes a lot of newspapers are very bias but the daily mail is especially so.

Should VT sensor it? No, simply because we allow news from a lot of sources and therefore it wouldn't be right to censor one but not any of the others that are terrible for giving the news. We can't do one and not do the others.