'Apologist for the Daily Mail'

A co-worker rather contemptuously described me as 'an apologist for the
Daily Mail' today. Because the office copy happened to have ended up on my
desk - for the first time in many a month. I found his straight-faced
description of it as 'utterly Nazi' both laughable and juvenile. The Daily
Mail is a rather unpleasant and slightly boorish right-wing tabloid
newspaper. If you identify that as being 'Nazi' then you have succumbed to
the same kind of hyperbole and exaggeration that fuels boorish right-wing
tabloids.

As per: nothing to say about the apologists for *brown* fascism one sees
from time to time in liberal newspapers and from the mayor of London (who he
seems to admire). How are the Mail Nazis I asked. I seem to recall they they
were the most vocal of all tabloids in the drive to catch Stephen Lawrence's
murderers. They even printed the killers faces on the front page and ask
them to sue if they wanted. He didn't like that.
'What about all their stuff about asylum seekers?' he asked, getting
desperate. 'Well,' I said, 'even the government now admit the system's out
of control'.

He walked off and sat down and said half-serious: 'tut tut, apologist for
the Daily Mail.'

'There are worse things to be,' I said.

--

'When language gets corrupted, thought gets corrupted.'

ROBBIE

On 11 Jun, 21:32, "ROBBIE" <hjkhj....TakeThisOut@hhhh.com> wrote:
> A co-worker rather contemptuously described me as 'an apologist for the
> Daily Mail' today. Because the office copy happened to have ended up on my
> desk - for the first time in many a month. I found his straight-faced
> description of it as 'utterly Nazi' both laughable and juvenile. The Daily
> Mail is a rather unpleasant and slightly boorish right-wing tabloid
> newspaper. If you identify that as being 'Nazi' then you have succumbed to
> the same kind of hyperbole and exaggeration that fuels boorish right-wing
> tabloids.
>
> As per: nothing to say about the apologists for *brown* fascism one sees
> from time to time in liberal newspapers and from the mayor of London (who he
> seems to admire). How are the Mail Nazis I asked. I seem to recall they they
> were the most vocal of all tabloids in the drive to catch Stephen Lawrence's
> murderers. They even printed the killers faces on the front page and ask
> them to sue if they wanted. He didn't like that.
> 'What about all their stuff about asylum seekers?' he asked, getting
> desperate. 'Well,' I said, 'even the government now admit the system's out
> of control'.
>
> He walked off and sat down and said half-serious: 'tut tut, apologist for
> the Daily Mail.'
>
> 'There are worse things to be,' I said.
>
> --
>
> 'When language gets corrupted, thought gets corrupted.'
>
> ROBBIE

How old was said co-worker?

Yes, the Mail is often nasty and mean-spirited. I despised it when I
was younger and I don't buy it now. I buy very few newspapers since
online does me well enough most of the time and who wants to *pay* to
be filled with dread and woe every morning.

With a certain maturity, however, I can look past the Mail's
nastiness, as you can, and recognise that this does not mean that it
is automatically wrong about everything. Another observation: most of
the people I see reading the Mail seem to me to be people who go out
to work everyday, obey the law, pay taxes, and generally live
restrained, decent, not particularly exciting, lives. They are not
Nazis.

See Blair having a pop at the Pissipendent? He's right but he's got
the brassest of brass faces to start shouting his mouth off about spin
now.