News0 min ago
How Does This Make You Feel, Daily Mail Readers?
33 Answers
At an 'Intelligence Squared' debate on the press, Peter Oborne, the Mail's political columnist...criticised the intelligence of his readers when he said (quote)...
"It's frustrating to write for the Daily Mail. You can't make erudite references to clever books you've read because it's written for the readers."
Next time you read the rag, please try to remember what he...and I have no doubt others of his colleagues...really think of you!
I have no web-page reference to the TMS article on page 15, as I saw it in the actual newspaper yesterday and, in any case, there is a pay-wall on access to The Times.
"It's frustrating to write for the Daily Mail. You can't make erudite references to clever books you've read because it's written for the readers."
Next time you read the rag, please try to remember what he...and I have no doubt others of his colleagues...really think of you!
I have no web-page reference to the TMS article on page 15, as I saw it in the actual newspaper yesterday and, in any case, there is a pay-wall on access to The Times.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Quizmonster. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Not what Peter Osborn says here.
/// On the other side of the argument we have Daily Mail columnist Peter Oborne and Roger Alton, former editor of the left-leaning Observer newspaper. As they will point out, the Mail is the UK’s most popular newspaper in print and online. Millions of ‘ordinary’ people read it because it understands and articulates their concerns better than other papers. Mail readers are decent, hardworking people, struggling to pay their bills, ambitious for their children and loyal to their country. Hatred of the Mail comes largely from the liberal elite who sneer at unfashionable types who don’t work at the BBC or the Guardian. The Mail may be hard on immigrants and celebrities, but it has served this country time and again by exposing the wrongdoings of the rich and powerful. And it has a fine track record as a campaigning newspaper, most famously bringing the killers of Stephen Lawrence to justice by naming them murderers and challenging them to sue. ///
/// On the other side of the argument we have Daily Mail columnist Peter Oborne and Roger Alton, former editor of the left-leaning Observer newspaper. As they will point out, the Mail is the UK’s most popular newspaper in print and online. Millions of ‘ordinary’ people read it because it understands and articulates their concerns better than other papers. Mail readers are decent, hardworking people, struggling to pay their bills, ambitious for their children and loyal to their country. Hatred of the Mail comes largely from the liberal elite who sneer at unfashionable types who don’t work at the BBC or the Guardian. The Mail may be hard on immigrants and celebrities, but it has served this country time and again by exposing the wrongdoings of the rich and powerful. And it has a fine track record as a campaigning newspaper, most famously bringing the killers of Stephen Lawrence to justice by naming them murderers and challenging them to sue. ///
Another link here not sure if this makes it any clearer.
http://
I don't buy any papers and from what little I have read of Peter Oborne, he is quite prone to these little outbursts.
http://
I don't buy any papers and from what little I have read of Peter Oborne, he is quite prone to these little outbursts.
hc4361
Most strange that you fail to accept a valid link of a debate in which Peter Osborn and Roger Alton, stated their side of the argument, yet you failed to address the fact that Quizmonster could not supply proof of what the same Peter Osborn said.
Seems like you are selective with whom you query.
Most strange that you fail to accept a valid link of a debate in which Peter Osborn and Roger Alton, stated their side of the argument, yet you failed to address the fact that Quizmonster could not supply proof of what the same Peter Osborn said.
Seems like you are selective with whom you query.
Apparently it was a debate carried out at the Royal Geographical Society.
Both sides outlined here, but still no mention on what the OP is claiming.
http://
Both sides outlined here, but still no mention on what the OP is claiming.
http://
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.