D
Dilligaf60
Guest
Dunno. Haven’t read it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Dunno. Haven’t read it.
Does anybody disagree with Littljohn's point? Doesn't seem unreasonable once you get past the intentionally controversial headline.
Because the entire article is riven with barely concealed homophobic and transphobic bile.
“Oh I’m not homophobic, but I’m going to spend the next 1000 words telling you why I hate the idea of two men sharing a picture of an ultrasound.”
he knows what he's doing, generating clicks for revenue. feeds both sides of the anger beast...The bloke's a tit but how the fuck can that be considered homophobic ffs?
after the demise of the ket-monster hopkins the mail needs a clickbaiter in chief...That's a bit of an exaggeration. Just like his writing.
he knows what he's doing, generating clicks for revenue. feeds both sides of the anger beast...
after the demise of the ket-monster hopkins the mail needs a clickbaiter in chief...
I couldn't give a fuck what his point is. Who actually does? Why would anyone care what he thinks about anything. It was the headline that caused all the bother and fair play to businesses not wanting to be associated with pointlessly controversial headlines like that. Hopefully others follow suit.Does anybody disagree with Littljohn's point? Doesn't seem unreasonable once you get past the intentionally controversial headline.
That's a bit of an exaggeration. Just like his writing.
I couldn't give a fuck what his point is. Who actually does? Why would anyone care what he thinks about anything. It was the headline that caused all the bother and fair play to businesses not wanting to be associated with pointlessly controversial headlines like that. Hopefully others follow suit.
Yes that and the fact that a lot of the Daily Hiel's current readership will be dead. (Frightened to death by its headlines probably)Not even slightly. He’s frothing at the mouth because, shock horror, there’s a picture of an ultrasound and, more shock horror, they happen to be male! Then for some unknown reason he goes off on a rant because a trans woman is breastfeeding.
The Mail lost millions last year as advertisers pulled out (fnar fnar) and this year looks like going the same way. With the Express now being owned by MGN the far right will struggle in the next few years imo.
The Mail lost millions last year as advertisers pulled out (fnar fnar) and this year looks like going the same way. With the Express now being owned by MGN the far right will struggle in the next few years imo.
Of all the hate and bile the Daily Mail prints this is what you chose to be offended by?
i'd be interested to know the difference in print vrs online advertising venue... they seem good at clickbait and whilst a different operation to the printed format, that website generates a lot of clicks.
i thought he had a right rant about the online editor which made it out in to the public domain? does he control online content anarl?It’s hilarious - they try and claim they’re 2 separate entities but then Dacre and the annual accounts always forget this and talk about them being one.
i thought he had a right rant about the online editor which made it out in to the public domain? does he control online content anarl?
I disagree. As far as I am aware all the evidence points to children getting the best from a loving, nurturing family. It seems to make no difference if the parents are same sex, different sex or single parent. It also seems to make no difference if the loving and nurturing comes from a nanny type figure rather than parents.Does anybody disagree with Littljohn's point? Doesn't seem unreasonable once you get past the intentionally controversial headline.