Originally Posted by Aristaeus:
“Good rule of thumb: if you're ever undecided about which stance to take on an issue, find out what the Daily Mail thinks and then take the opposite stance.”
if only it were that simple.
Disagree with the poster upthread who says it's "always factual and balanced" but it's had a FEW effective campaigns which fly in the face of it's other predictable rhetoric
eg. Stephen Lawrence
GM Foods/Science
it's current one appears to be corruption & nepotism in Foreign Aid.
OTOH it's as effective as the Guardian in scare stories and hysteria .....whilst on something genuinely scary like climate change it's in total denial. ( Meanwhile the G covers climate change well but promotes profligate consumption/travel etc.)