[AnabeeKnox]

The Daily Mail is neither fake news, nor propaganda, nor a content farm. These are ludicrous suggestions. It's an unpleasant sensationalist tabloid, but it abides by the UK press standards authority. There are equivalents in every western country.

[pessimizer]

It's definitely a content farm; I suppose the other two accusations depend on one's personal definitions.

"The production process was simple. During a day shift—8 a.m. to about 6 p.m—four news editors stationed together near Clarke's desk assigned stories to reporters from a continually updated list of other publications' articles, to which I did not have access. Throughout the day, they would monitor the website's traffic to determine what was getting clicked on and what to remove from the homepage."

from: My Year Ripping Off the Web With the Daily Mail Online @ http://tktk.gawker.com/my-year-ripping-off-the-web-with-the-...

https://www.ithenticate.com/plagiarism-detection-blog/daily-...

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jun/09/news-corp-accu...

[stcredzero]

The Daily Mail is neither fake news, nor propaganda, nor a content farm...There are equivalents in every western country.

The elephant in the newsroom, is that declining subscribers and outdated business models are pulling down the whole of legacy media towards the level of unpleasant sensationalist tabloid and further. The lack of fact checking we saw in the wake of the Covington Kids debacle stands in stark contrast to the level of journalistic integrity Dan Rather was held to on his fall from grace.

Legacy media can't compete with the Internet, and its quality is declining as it's circling the drain.

[toby-]

He wasn't necessarily implying the Daily Mail is propaganda or a content farm. They are, however, a tabloid of ill repute.

[contravariant]

If you as me 'unpleasant sensationalist tabloid' fits nicely in the category of 'tabloid, 'fake news'/propaganda and content farms'.

[stordoff]

The ISPO has ruled against the Daily Mail / Mail Online multiple times:

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/rul... - "The publication had failed to handle publication sensitively"

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/rul... - "Publishing photographs of the complainants taken in such circumstances represented an intrusion; the publication had not sought to justify the publication of the images in the public interest."

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/rul... - accuracy ("This gave rise to a misleading impression of the effects of GDPR legislation")

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/rul... - accuracy ("This article was a report of an inquest, in which the deceased had been inaccurately identified. This was a fundamental and damaging error on a basic point of fact. [...T]he correct position was readily available, [so] there had been a failure on the part of the agency providing the story to take care over its accuracy.")

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/rul... - accuracy ("The repetition of these serious allegations against the man, with no indication they had been disproven, seriously misrepresented the judgment")

amongst others.