Daily Mail lies

meester

The Daily Mail is a good wind-up paper, and sometimes the stories printed in it are interesting.

But is it possible to take any of them seriously?

I just saw this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1032392/Scroungers-com-Website-charges-95-tips-claiming-maximum-disability-benefit.html

"Scroungers.com: Website charges £95 for tips on claiming maximum disability benefit"

"
An internet company is doing lucrative business selling cynical tips on how to squeeze the most disability benefit from the Government – for £95 a time.
Customers who sign up are given advice designed to convince ‘snooping’ doctors that patients are sick enough to receive the maximum handouts.
Claimants are told to hide any evidence suggesting they may not be eligible for the biggest payouts, such as concealing the fact they are able to travel by public transport or ensuring their walking sticks look well used."


If you check the screenshot in the article it goes to

http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/

which says:

Become a Benefits and Work member now and for just £18.95 you'll receive a year's unlimited access to all our renowned guides for claimants and to all the DWP materials we've obtained using the Freedom of Information Act. You also get unlimited access to all our members only news stories and to the members forum.
What are the limits on what I can use?
You can visit and download everything you need as often as you need for a full year.
All we ask is that you only use the resources for yourself or the person you're providing care for.

The £95 quoted the Daily Lies actually provides Professional membership gives you and any other staff in your office access to all the resources available to claimants, plus some resources only available to professional members.
In addition, you will receive a licence to reproduce the Benefits and Work guides on paper, on disc or as an email attachment (but not on a website) for any clients that you work with. You can also use the guides for training purposes.

Is there any point in reading it when they routinely lie, distory and mislead?

dmg24

The article is clearly misleading with regard to stating it costs £95 to join it. However, whilst the website does have helpful information for genuine claimants, it does also act as a source of information for those that submit false claims.

The issue that I have with BenefitsandWork is that it charges for membership. In my mind it is the equivalent of MSE, but with a different specialist area. The idea of profiting from 'helping' people when they are often at their lowest, does not sit comfotably ith me.

I haven't looked at the website much before, as I find that the great majority of information on there is also available free of charge elsewhere (usually here!). However, I do find the Feedback page incredibly tacky. Lines such as "£4,200 had been paid into my post office account" and "almost £2,000 had been credited!" puts me in the mind of those nasty no win no fee legal firms.

Blacksheep1979

So you found this article which tends to hint at the fact you were reading the trash rag?

dmg24

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

So you found this article which tends to hint at the fact you were reading the trash rag?

I have to admit that I read it! However, I am well aware that anything I read in the press should be taken with a rather large pinch of salt, and I suppose my primary reason for reading it is to get some light relief from reality?

trisontana

The Mail does tend to have problems with the truth sometimes. Recently they ran an article about British troops destroying a huge drugs haul in Afghanistan. According to that article the locals had been "producing opium from dried cannabis leaves". Now that is an accomplishment!

In another article they claimed a pet dog was so big it could "be seen from space" via Google Earth. Of course most images shown on Google earth are not taken from satellites, but from planes flying at a few thousand feet.

Blacksheep1979

Sorry dmg - was pointing that at the op who seems to want to slate the rag yet obviously reads it?!?

pinkshoes

I read the Daily Mail online when bored, as I find some of the stories hilarious, blatantly scaremongering, and rife with spelling mistakes!

I certainly would take anything written in it seriously!! It's generally all a load of cods wallop, but is a great source of entertainment when very bored!

meester

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

Sorry dmg - was pointing that at the op who seems to want to slate the rag yet obviously reads it?!?

Yes I read it, and don't get me wrong, my sympathies are broadly in line with theirs, so if I read something like this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031784/Schoolboys-punished-detention-refusing-kneel-pray-Allah.html

"Schoolboys punished with detention for refusing to kneel in class and pray to Allah"

it does wind me up.

But the problem is you read it and it's never clear how much of it is exaggerated or completely made up.

I would be a lot more confident with what they print if they didn't so transparently set out to mislead.

sarahg1969

http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/content/category/11/17/43/

Boo to those "snooping" doctors. Forget the medicals and filling in forms - just give them the money, I say.

trisontana

For an insight on how most newspapers distort the truth may I recommend the book Flat Earth News :- http://www.flatearthnews.net/about-book

As well as covering the big news issues such as Iraq, it also shows how small and insignificant items are blown out of all proportions. One example started with a memo from a junior council employee asking about the use of Christmas lights in relation to other religious festivals. This was turned into the dramatic headline "Councils To Ban Christmas Lights Because Of Offence To Muslims".

Another favourite target for some newspapers is to do with bogus health and safety warnings and stories. This has got so bad that the Health and Safety Executive have started a myth-busting section on their website to dispel some of these distortions of the truth.

liquidlives

Now I read the Daily Mail every day (except Sunday) and you really have to take what they print with a pinch of salt. I am generally critical of things I read and it is quite easy to see where journalists are trying to exaggerate one view of a particular issue and ignore the opposing side. Richard Littlejohn amuses me though, so I persist in reading it.