Daily Mail making up stories? Never

Even if the baby has raised its arm slightly, after being stamped on, is that really all it would do? and how on earth was the reporter there, able to catch the moment her foot is on the baby?
 
anant_shah94 said:
Even if the baby has raised its arm slightly, after being stamped on, is that really all it would do? and how on earth was the reporter there, able to catch the moment her foot is on the baby?
Click to expand...

I'm not claiming she actually did stamp on the baby, I'm just getting bored of everyone calling "shopped" for every single picture that shows something to be even remotely out of the ordinary. (e.g. whale on ship thread, and this thread)

From those photos it looks like she may have dropped the baby or even just put the baby on the floor to have a go at the police man.

If anything, it looks like she is stepping over the baby in the first pic.
 
That...just makes no sense. Why would you make up a story like that, she was accused of stealing a phone so stomped on her baby. Yeah...that's what people do.

Also those pictures are faker than my Rolix watch! Besides the story which is just...odd the pictures are terrible. I cant believe someone thought that would fly!
 
campbell said:
Did she stamp on the baby?
Click to expand...

No. The daily mail bought the (faked) pictures because it's readers like feeling anti-foreigner sentiment amongst other emotions (anti-gay, anti immigrant, medical fears etc etc) - it's one of the main reasons they buy the paper and they expect anti-foreigner tat to appear as regularly as possible.

The daily mail has never much bothered with the truth. The paper is more a vehicle to stir up anger and emotion (using the truth if it serves their purpose, if not, make it up).

There are a LOT of people who want to feel hatred towards other groups (psychologically apparently it's generally people with lower self esteem, it makes them feel better about themselves, as at least they are 'not as bad as the scum they're reading about'). It can also help justify to some readers their feelings of racism, homophobia etc, which, with lots of society against such thoughts, they want justified. These people are prepared to pay for such things - hence the daily mail.

It's a hate-rag basically. But without people willing to pay for it, it wouldn't exist! So who is to blame?
 
Last edited:
not only that, but after the baby's been supposedly stamped on, why are there people around there that are just ignoring it on the floor. Most have their back's turned anyway!
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Why did photographers take a photo of Diana dying and not help her?

Sorry to drag the Diana story into this, but was the best example I could think of!
Click to expand...

There were lots of photographers with zero medical knowledge.

They didn't know she was going to die. Had she lived and the photographers worked together on exclusivity, those photos may have easily fetched > £10m for the photographers. Not bad for 30 seconds work.

Anyway, we digress ..
 
britboy4321 said:
There were lots of photographers with zero medical knowledge.

They didn't know she was going to die. Had she lived and the photographers worked together on exclusivity, those photos may have easily fetched > £10m for the photographers. Not bad for 30 seconds work.

Anyway, we digress ..
Click to expand...
Yet they still didn't help her.. I place my baggage on the floor, for a moment of respite.

/irestmycase
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom