The Daily Fail

[St. Luigi Scrosoppi]

This is what the Times was reporting this morning and I enjoyed it all the more for having earlier read a piece of fiction published by the Mail saying that VVD had played his last game for Saints.

The Daily Mail is to be banned as a source for the Wikipedia website in all but exceptional circumstances after it was deemed “generally unreliable”.
The move was agreed by volunteer editors of the online encyclopaedia, who said that the arguments for a ban “centred on the Daily Mail’s reputation for poor fact-checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication”. Opponents of the ban pointed to inaccurate stories in other publications.
The Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia but does not control the editing, said that volunteer editors on English Wikipedia had been discussing the newspaper’s reliability for at least two years. It said: “Volunteer editors . . . have come to a consensus that the Daily Mail is ‘generally unreliable’ and its use as a reference is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist.”
The decision is expected to fall short of banning linking to the paper, because there will be occasions when an entry is about it or its journalists. Instead, it is likely that a flagging system will ask editors not to use it as a source. Editors have asked volunteers to review about 12,000 existing links to the paper and replace them where possible.

 

[TheSecondStain]

Wikipedia displaying more fair minded wisdom than The Daily Fail does itself.

 

[Osvaldorama]

I'm a big believer in free speech, but that detestable rag actually influences opinion to the point that it should be banned, IMO.
Disgusting paper, and the worst part is the amount of people (cretins) that believe everything they write.

 

[ImpSaint]

I'm a big believer in free speech, but that detestable rag actually influences opinion to the point that it should be banned, IMO.
Disgusting paper, and the worst part is the amount of people (cretins) that believe everything they write.

Does it also say that the Mail banned its reporters from using wikipedia as a source 2 years ago?

This is the start of censorship and the start of something that will spiral into state "decent" society approved propaganda.

The agenda will be clear.......if it doesn't agree with the acceptable "neo-liberal/neo-con centrist" viewpoint then it is fake and to be banned.

 

[----HistoryRepeating----]

Melania Trump is so outraged about their Virgil Van Dijk false transfer speculation that she is suing them for £150M! Well, that's what a Mail journo just told me.
They are getting a tough time this week.

 

[Whiteley Saint]

I'm sure the Mail are devastated. It's not like anyone can update Wikipedia.......

 

[----HistoryRepeating----]

I'm all for free speech, but there's needs to be more accountability involved.

 

[davecg69]

I love the Daily Fail website. Reading the comments to their articles is always a great laugh!

 

[Beddy]

I'm all for free speech, but there's needs to be more accountability involved.

Indeed there should be..........but that applies to all information gathering sources. I would be surprised if Wikipedia though actually looked to newspapers for info.

 

[----HistoryRepeating----]

I think the newspapers look to wiki!

 

[ImpSaint]

I'm all for free speech, but there's needs to be more accountability involved.

I agree on that point but we are talking about all press in varying degrees including screen media. The BBC are continually having complaints upheld and most of them are not the ones you don't like i.e. things Clarkson says or casual racism.

They have been consistently pulled up for exaggerating evidence to support claims. Using "evidence" out of context and for many "opinions" being presented as facts as part of their news reports.

The problem is normally not that there is accountability it is who is doing the monitoring (BBC Trust/BBC ESC) and what happens about it (nothing.)

One subject the BBC has never ever had a complaint upheld on is the EU! So they must be incredibly factual, accurate with no unbiased reporting on the subject of the EU Fair enough then eh!

The Mail like all others should be challenged, not censored and Osvaldorama above confirms, the "decent" people in society thinks that more than a fair amount of readers of any publication believe completely everything written in their newspapers.

Until of course it gets to football where Southampton supporting Mail readers suddenly develop the ability to say "that is not true" when it is reported that Saints won because "x" team played badly or they are pulling up spurious rumours about all of our players (apart from Davis) being subject to interest from every club in Europe.

 

[SAINTDON13]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...remier-League-club-s-highest-paid-player.html

Fraser the top earner?

 

[Onionman]

This is nothing at all to do with "free speech". It's simply a comment on their reliability as a source of facts.

Vin

 

[ImpSaint]

This is nothing at all to do with "free speech". It's simply a comment on their reliability as a source of facts.

Vin

reliability as a source of facts? Wikipedia is suggesting someone else is more unreliable than themselves? Come on.

It is far from that. It is a witch-hunt on one MSM target which will lead to many more once it gains traction. It is a prime example of the neo-liberal contstruct trying to close down differing opinions. The very same sort of people screaming about Trump saying fake news are now doing the same and all it ever does is play into these people's hands. It will result in "see they closed down x because they disagree with the views it expresses."

That is not to say that people read the mail and believe it. However they instantly understand the vibe of "they are closing down different opinions."

Anyone that thinks that Mail readers even while nodding their heads in approval actually believe it all hook line and sinker is in a fairyland world, and those that take the SJW angle and scream for suppression of differing viewpoints, no matter how far from the truth those viewpoints are is countering the result they are trying to achieve, hence Trump, Alt-right and add lots more to the list. It's all free publicity which was predicted by the very people that they are trying to suppress. I expect the Mail readership will go up now. Well done to the campaigners. Fight the fight yet lose the war. This would be useful reading for many:

http://observer.com/2017/02/i-helpe...aybook-you-should-stop-playing-right-into-it/

 

[Saints_Alive]

Well done Wiki...and well done Liverpool Football Club for banning that toilet rag The Sun from their ground.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-38933817

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

I find the rise of the thought police really worrying. They honestly seem to believe that there only one viewpoint and anyone who holds a different opinion is obviously stupid and uneducated. And of course there is no point in having discussions with such people....in fact, the only thing to do is shut them up. As said, such behaviour can be counterproductive. It's a close thing who I hate the most.... these precious people or their targets, such as Trump.

 

[----HistoryRepeating----]

Although I understand the L'pool community will be rather pleased by this news, they shouldn't underestimate the damage it can do. Remember our little run it, every drama becomes a crisis, every crack a crevice. Even the mighty LFC might suffer because of this.

 

[Saints_Alive]

Although I understand the L'pool community will be rather pleased by this news, they shouldn't underestimate the damage it can do. Remember our little run it, every drama becomes a crisis, every crack a crevice. Even the mighty LFC might suffer because of this.

Well it can't be as bad as having its' supporters names tarnished as a drunken rampaging mob that caused the deaths of 96 of their fellow fans and then robbing them as they lay dying.
If the same happened to our fans I would hope that our club would act in the same way.

 

[St. Luigi Scrosoppi]

I find the rise of the thought police really worrying. They honestly seem to believe that there only one viewpoint and anyone who holds a different opinion is obviously stupid and uneducated. And of course there is no point in having discussions with such people....in fact, the only thing to do is shut them up. As said, such behaviour can be counterproductive. It's a close thing who I hate the most.... these precious people or their targets, such as Trump.

Having seen the result of the EU referendum and having been a socialist all my life I have crossed right over and think that there should be an assessment of intellect before people should be granted the right to vote. I asked one leaver why she voted for Brexit and she said because her neighbour was a pole and she didn't like him.

 

[----HistoryRepeating----]

Yep, I agree, just don't underestimate the media, they have ways of subtly attacking. L'pool are at a low ebb, the timing couldn't be worse for a stand.