The Mail gets dirty

londonTiger

fisherjim wrote: »

Seems like you can't get your facts right either!

I could show you at least five car parks near me that are not signed up properly, including a Tesco where the entrance sign is behind the Tesco sign and impossible to see from your car!

So what? are you that niave to drive into a supermarket car park OR ANY CAR PARK for that matter and assume it's free to park unless otherwise stated, then you deserve a ticket.

I for one will always double check the parking restrictions inside a car park before I leave the premisis. There is sufficient time allowed for you to drive in, park in and look for signage displaying the prices. If you don't like the prices you can drive out without penalty (done that a few times).

Besides the opening story seems to have overstayed in their bay from what I recall. So lack of signage is no defence in her case anyway because she would have paid for 3 hours.

Guys_Dad

grant_uk wrote: »

You're kidding, right? The Daily Mail is one of the worst offenders for printing articles based on PR releases instead of news. You can spot these a mile off.


They have a headline to grab your attention, refer to some dodgy research and in the 2nd or 3rd paragraph will be a website link or company name for the people who paid to have the article put together in the first place.

Michael Marshall of Merseyside Skeptics does a lot on this subject and does a talk at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT7ulnOKvJU if you're interested in hearing how these things work.

And don't get me started on socialists either (note: I said socialists, not labour voters)

So maybe you will take up my challenge to find any articles from a Daily Mail this week that does just that. No need even to buy the paper - search the online version. Or do you still want to peddle your unfounded prejudice?

Don't get me wrong here - I am not a great supporter of the Mail. I am however an opponent of the diminishing liberal intelligentsia who look down their noses at the vast majority of ordinary folk and choose to heap approbation on anyone or anything that smacks of being anywhere right of centre.

grant_uk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

And don't get me started on socialists either (note: I said socialists, not labour voters)

So maybe you will take up my challenge to find any articles from a Daily Mail this week that does just that. No need even to buy the paper - search the online version. Or do you still want to peddle your unfounded prejudice?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2709298/Mum-celebrates-shedding-2-stone-sexy-photo-shoot.html

Note the references to Centerparks and Slimming World, with a direct link to the latter at the foot of the article.

grant_uk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

And don't get me started on socialists either (note: I said socialists, not labour voters)

So maybe you will take up my challenge to find any articles from a Daily Mail this week that does just that. No need even to buy the paper - search the online version. Or do you still want to peddle your unfounded prejudice?

Here's another one that mentions Boots a couple of times - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/food/article-2709078/We-buying-suncream-dont-know-use-claim-experts.html

System

londonTiger wrote: »

So what? are you that niave to drive into a supermarket car park OR ANY CAR PARK for that matter and assume it's free to park unless otherwise stated, then you deserve a ticket..

What a weird world you live in where all the supermarkets charge for parking. None of the supermarkets in my area charge or have a time limit on parking.

Maybe the store managers in my area are a bit more savvy than yours and don't get sucked in by the b****x spouted by the PPCs to justify their use.

Guys_Dad

grant_uk wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2709298/Mum-celebrates-shedding-2-stone-sexy-photo-shoot.html

Note the references to Centerparks and Slimming World, with a direct link to the latter at the foot of the article.

Well, if you are going to include such "puff" articles written in motoring sections. Health, D-I-Y, beauty, travel/holiday sections, Femail, etc, then yes you will find links or product placement. However, this is not unique to any newspaper.

I should have been more specific - I was referring before to news articles and them being accused of being utter tripe or slanted so far from the truth.

No one can base their prejudices against any newspaper because some previously overweight lady has an article written that mentions or links to a product, surely.

Check out travel sections for instance in all newspapers from the Mirror to the Times and see what I mean.

Herzlos

londonTiger wrote: »

I for one will always double check the parking restrictions inside a car park before I leave the premisis. There is sufficient time allowed for you to drive in, park in and look for signage displaying the prices. If you don't like the prices you can drive out without penalty (done that a few times).

People have been invoiced for doing just that.

And in many car parks the restrictions aren't visible until you've already parked (small text 10ft in the air), which in a lot of cases aren't correctly worded either.

Besides the opening story seems to have overstayed in their bay from what I recall. So lack of signage is no defence in her case anyway because she would have paid for 3 hours.

Indeed, and she's liable to reimburse the land owner the loss she cost them. Since it was a free car park, that's a whopping £0 unless there's definitive proof that she denied another customer an opportunity to actually spend money. As in, there'd need to be no other spaces free in the car park.

Stopping people violating parking conditions is fine; making the conditions deliberately obtuse/misleading to cause violations isn't, neither are the exhorbitant sums demanded for breaches, which make up the entire business model of these companies.

Guys_Dad

grant_uk wrote: »

Here's another one that mentions Boots a couple of times - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/food/article-2709078/We-buying-suncream-dont-know-use-claim-experts.html

And Tesco, M&S, Ocado, Sainsbury, Aldi, Waitrose, ASDA,Morrisons, Persil, Nectar.

IT'S A SHOPPING ADVICE ARTICLE, FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE!

grant_uk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Well, if you are going to include such "puff" articles written in motoring sections. Health, D-I-Y, beauty, travel/holiday sections, Femail, etc, then yes you will find links or product placement. However, this is not unique to any newspaper.

I should have been more specific - I was referring before to news articles and them being accused of being utter tripe or slanted so far from the truth.

No one can base their prejudices against any newspaper because some previously overweight lady has an article written that mentions or links to a product, surely.

Check out travel sections for instance in all newspapers from the Mirror to the Times and see what I mean.

Aye whatever - I was pretty clear what I was talking about and I also provided a link to Michael Marshall's talk on where many current newspaper stories tend to come from, not just the advertorials masquerading as genuine articles.

I'll assume you've not bothered listening to it at all if you've written it off as conspiracy.

bazster

What's this got to do with parking? Take it somewhere else please.