Sunday, 10 April 2011

Look At This Filth! Just LOOK At It!!

The 'Mail' excels itself today, with a blazing headline about the deaths of two horses in the Grand National:

Trawling the web for comments, they find plenty:
One viewer wrote on the corporation’s own website: ‘I’m amazed that the BBC coverage pans over the tarpaulins on the re-run and the commentators just talk about “obstacles”.’
Another said: ‘And the BBC – shame on you. No mention of what’s happened, even when there’s 2 dead covered horses on screen.’
On The Mail on Sunday website, commenters also expressed outrage. ‘Jax’ branded the race ‘disgusting and cruel’, adding: ‘It’s not the Grand National, it’s a national disgrace.’
Another, ‘Phoenix’, said: ‘I cannot believe in this day and age that this kind of public cruelty still goes on. Two animals died today but nobody cares, we’ll do it all again next year.’
John Ledbury wrote: ‘It’s appalling that two horses died for our amusement. This jump should be banned.’
With the ubiquitous rent-a-quote spokesman from Animal Aid following on, it's clear that the 'Mail' is firmly on the side of 'Ban this awful spectacle NOW!' campaigners.

But the rest of the article consists of no less than fourteen photos of the race, all but three of them showing horses coming to grief at fences.

In fact, reading to the end, you get the distinct impression the only reason they haven't printed a photo of a course vet approaching a stricken beast, boltgun in hand, is because they don't have one.

The effect is rather like that of a maiden aunt thrusting a copy of 'Playboy' under your nose, opened to the worst page, to make sure you really understand just what sort of filth is in there to provoke her outrage...


Curmudgeon said...

Hmm, and yesterday the Mail had a centre-page spread showing all the runners and riders in the Grand National. Not that they are hypocrites or anything like that, of course...

Macheath said...

The Mail seems to be making a habit of this kind of thing; the same issue carries a pseudo-sympathetic account of the 'holiday hell' being endured by Jeremy Clarkson's wife.

The 'hell' in question results from the tabloid coverage of her husband's alleged affair with a researcher - a story carried in full - with pictures - by the Mail, whose photographers are, of course, now pursuing the injured wife everywhere she goes.

Macheath said...

PS Not that I normally read this kind of thing, of course...

It's just that my eye was caught by the unbelievable lack of irony in the Mail labelling this story a 'car-crash'.

Mark Wadsworth said...

The Mail is the only newspaper which trolls its own readers.

(It was Caitlin Moran of the Times who pointed that out, I have to say I agree).

Curmudgeon said...

Yes, good point Mark. One day they'll have a campaign to "save the local pub", next day they'll be banging on about the evils of binge-drinking. One day they'll be complaining about the police "reign of terror" on the roads hitting middle-class motorists, next day (like yesterday) they'll be saying in shock "Do 86 mph and you won't be fined!"

Furor Teutonicus said...

The "red" and "green" arrows say it all about their readers as well.

One comment gets three hundred red arrows. Three posts down, same comment under a different name, and it gets 300 Green arrows.

Bloody schizophrenics with Dissociative identity disorder, the lot of them.

blueknight said...

Tomorrow's fish and chip wrappers....

JuliaM said...

"The Mail seems to be making a habit of this kind of thing..."

As Mark W points out, it does seem as if it's trolling its own readers, doesn't it?

"The "red" and "green" arrows say it all about their readers as well."

It's always amusing to see a clearly-snarky comment get treated seriously in the 'ratings'.. :)

"Tomorrow's fish and chip wrappers...."

Why wait until tomorrow?