Content deleted Content added
→top: As the fourth sentence explains, MailOnline is a separate online publication with its own editor. The reference after "and website" even explains, "MailOnline is run separately (though Dacre, as editor-in-chief, has oversight) |
KMaster888 (talk | contribs) ce |
||
| (38 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown) | |||
Line 2:
{{About|the British national daily newspaper}}
{{Pp-vandalism|small=yes}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=
{{Use British English|date=August 2011}}
{{excessive examples|date=September 2024}}
{{Infobox newspaper
| name = Daily Mail
| logo = [[File:Daily Mail masthead.svg|frameless|class=skin-invert]]
| image = Daily Mail 10 July 2021.png
| caption = ''Daily Mail'' front page on 11 July 2021
Line 21 ⟶ 22:
2 Derry Street
[[Kensington|London W8]] 5TT
| circulation =
| circulation_date =
| circulation_ref = <ref>{{cite web |title=Daily Mail |url=https://www.abc.org.uk/product/2115 |publisher=[[Audit Bureau of Circulations (UK)|Audit Bureau of Circulations]] |date=13 February 2024 |access-date=3 March 2024 |archive-date=23 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200923135549/https://www.abc.org.uk/product/2115 |url-status=live }}</ref>
| ISSN = 0307-7578
| oclc = 16310567
Line 30 ⟶ 31:
{{Conservatism UK|Media}}
The '''''Daily Mail''''' is a British daily [[Middle-market newspaper|middle-market]] [[Tabloid journalism|tabloid]] newspaper published in London. It was founded in 1896. {{As of|2020}}, it
The paper is owned by the [[Daily Mail and General Trust]].
A survey in 2014 found the average age of its readers was 58, and it had the lowest demographic for 15- to 44-year-olds among the [[List of newspapers in the United Kingdom#Tabloid newspapers|major British dailies]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.themediabriefing.com/article/youth-audiences-newspaper-old-demographics-advertising |title=How old are you again? UK newspaper age demographics in 4 charts |first=Henry |last=Taylor |work=The Media Briefing |date=14 August 2014 |access-date=5 March 2017 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20161227160455/https://www.themediabriefing.com/article/youth-audiences-newspaper-old-demographics-advertising |archive-date=27 December 2016 }}</ref> Uniquely for a British daily newspaper, women make up the majority (52–55%) of its readership.<ref>{{cite news |author=Hannah Fearn |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/daily-mail-brexit-legs-it-theresa-may-nicola-sturgeon-female-readershop-women-feminism-a7654326.html |title=The Daily Mail has a mainly female readership – so why do women enjoy those 'who won Legs-it' headlines? |work=The Independent |date=28 March 2017 |access-date=12 November 2017 |archive-date=7 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190507070459/https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/daily-mail-brexit-legs-it-theresa-may-nicola-sturgeon-female-readershop-women-feminism-a7654326.html |url-status=live }}</ref> It had an average daily circulation of 1.13 million copies in February 2020.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=Mayhew|first=Freddy|date=19 March 2020|title=National newspaper ABCs: Daily Mail closes circulation gap on Sun to 5,500 copies|url=https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/national-newspaper-abcs-daily-mail-closes-circulation-gap-on-sun-to-5500-copies/|access-date=2 August 2020|website=Press Gazette|language=en-US|archive-date=25 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200825045919/https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/national-newspaper-abcs-daily-mail-closes-circulation-gap-on-sun-to-5500-copies/|url-status=live}}</ref> Between April 2019 and March 2020 it had an average daily readership of approximately 2.18 million, of whom approximately 1.41 million were in the [[NRS social grade|ABC1]] demographic and 0.77 million in the [[NRS social grade|C2DE]] demographic.<ref>{{Cite web|last=PAMCo|title=Data Archive – Newsbrand Reach Tables|url=https://pamco.co.uk/pamco-data/data-archive/|access-date=18 August 2020|website=pamco.co.uk|archive-date=7 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210407122153/https://pamco.co.uk/pamco-data/data-archive/|url-status=live}}</ref> Its website had more than 218 million unique visitors per month in 2020.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Alpert|first=Lukas I.|date=5 December 2019|title=Daily Mail's Online Reinvention Relieves Pressure Amid Newspaper-Industry Woes|language=en-US|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/daily-mails-online-reinvention-relieves-pressure-amid-newspaper-industry-woes-11575530597|access-date=2 August 2020|issn=0099-9660|archive-date=29 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200129174744/https://www.wsj.com/articles/daily-mails-online-reinvention-relieves-pressure-amid-newspaper-industry-woes-11575530597|url-status=live}}</ref>
The ''Daily Mail'' has won several awards, including receiving the [[The Press Awards#National Newspaper of the Year|''National Newspaper of the Year'' award]] from [[The Press Awards]] nine times since 1994 ({{As of|2020|lc=y}}).<ref>{{Cite web|last=Brown|first=Mariella|date=3 April 2020|title=Winners of the National Press Awards for 2019 revealed – Society of Editors|url=https://www.societyofeditors.org/soe_news/winners-of-the-national-press-awards-for-2019-revealed/|access-date=20 June 2020|language=en-GB|archive-date=26 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200426211212/https://www.societyofeditors.org/soe_news/winners-of-the-national-press-awards-for-2019-revealed/|url-status=live}}</ref> The [[Society of Editors]] selected it as the 'Daily Newspaper of the Year' for 2020.<ref>{{cite web| url=https://uk.news.yahoo.com/journalists-recognised-society-editors-press-115013932.html| title=Journalists recognised at Society Of Editors' Press Awards| publisher=Yahoo News| date=15 July
==Overview==
The ''Mail'' was originally a [[broadsheet]] but switched to a compact format on 3 May 1971, the 75th anniversary of its founding.<ref>{{cite news |title=London Daily Mail goes compact |first=Robert |last=Nelson |url=https://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/csmonitor_historic/access/263913472.html?dids=263913472:263913472&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=May+05%2C+1971&author=By+Robert+Nelson+Staff+correspondent+of+The+Christian+Science+Monitor&pub=Christian+Science+Monitor&desc=London+Daily+Mail+goes+compact |newspaper=The Christian Science Monitor |location=Boston, Massachusetts |date=5 May 1971 |access-date=24 January 2011 |archive-date=18 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120618234319/http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/csmonitor_historic/access/263913472.html?dids=263913472:263913472&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=May+05%2C+1971&author=By+Robert+Nelson+Staff+correspondent+of+The+Christian+Science+Monitor&pub=Christian+Science+Monitor&desc=London+Daily+Mail+goes+compact |url-status=
Circulation figures according to the [[Audit Bureau of Circulations (UK)|Audit Bureau of Circulations]] in February 2020 show gross daily sales of 1,134,184 for the ''Daily Mail''.<ref name=":0" /> According to a December 2004 survey, 53% of ''Daily Mail'' readers voted for the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]], compared to 21% for [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour]] and 17% for the [[Liberal Democrats (UK)|Liberal Democrats]].<ref name="MORI survey">{{cite web|url=http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2004/voting-by-readership.shtml|title=MORI survey of newspaper readers|access-date=21 December 2007 |archive-url = https://archive.today/20071213203908/http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2004/voting-by-readership.shtml <!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. --> |archive-date = 13 December 2007}}</ref> The main concern of [[Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere|Viscount Rothermere]], the current chairman and main shareholder, is that the circulation be maintained. He testified before a [[House of Lords]] [[Select committee (United Kingdom)|select committee]] that "we need to allow editors the freedom to edit", and therefore the newspaper's editor was free to decide editorial policy, including its political allegiance.<ref name="agenda">{{cite news |url=http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article3971966.ece |newspaper=The Times |location=London |author=Sabbagh, Dan |title=Paul Dacre can set Daily Mail agenda, says Viscount Rothermere |date=21 May 2008 |access-date=30 April 2010 |url-access=limited |archive-date=31 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110831101106/http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article3971966.ece |url-status=
==History==
Line 48 ⟶ 49:
The ''Daily Mail'', devised by [[Alfred Harmsworth, 1st Viscount Northcliffe|Alfred Harmsworth]] (later Viscount Northcliffe) and his brother [[Harold Harmsworth, 1st Viscount Rothermere|Harold]] (later Viscount Rothermere), was first published on 4 May 1896. It was an immediate success.<ref name=":1" />{{rp|28}} It cost a halfpenny at a time when other London dailies cost one penny, and was more populist in tone and more concise in its coverage than its rivals. The planned issue was 100,000 copies, but the print run on the first day was 397,215, and additional printing facilities had to be acquired to sustain a circulation that rose to 500,000 in 1899. [[Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury|Lord Salisbury]], 19th-century [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]], dismissed the ''Daily Mail'' as "a newspaper produced by office boys for office boys."<ref name="Victorians">{{cite book|last = Wilson|first = A. N.|author-link = A. N. Wilson|title = The Victorians|publisher = W. W. Norton|year = 2003|location = New York|page = [https://archive.org/details/victorians00wils/page/590 590]|url = https://archive.org/details/victorians00wils/page/590|isbn = 978-0-393-04974-9}}</ref>{{rp|590–591}} By 1902, at the end of the [[Boer War]]s, the circulation was over a million, making it the largest in the world.<ref name="Griffiths2006">{{cite book|title=Fleet Street: Five Hundred Years of the Press|first=Dennis |last=Griffiths|publisher=The British Library |pages=132–133|isbn=0-7123-0697-8|year=2006}}</ref><ref name="Paul2001a">{{cite book|title=News and News Sources|page=83|author=Paul Manning|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yddZAAAAMAAJ|isbn=978-0-7619-5796-6|year=2001|publisher=Sage Publications|access-date=10 November 2020|archive-date=17 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220217075159/https://books.google.com/books?id=yddZAAAAMAAJ|url-status=live}}</ref>
With Harold running the business side of the operation and Alfred as editor, the ''Mail'' from the start adopted an [[Imperialism|imperialist]] political stance, taking a patriotic line in the [[Second Boer War]], leading to claims that it was not reporting the issues of the day objectively.<ref name="Ref_a">Gardiner, The Times, The Atlantic Monthly, January 1917 p. 113</ref> The ''Mail'' also set out to entertain its readers with human interest stories, serials, features and competitions.<ref name=":2">{{Cite book|last=Mackenzie|first=Frederick Arthur|url=http://archive.org/details/mysteryofdailyma00mackrich|title=The
In 1900, the ''Daily Mail'' began printing simultaneously in both Manchester and London, the first national newspaper to do so (in 1899, the ''Daily Mail'' had organised special trains to bring the London-printed papers north). The same production method was adopted in 1909 by the ''[[Daily Sketch]]'', in 1927 by the ''[[Daily Express]]'' and eventually by virtually all the other national newspapers. Printing of the ''Scottish Daily Mail'' was switched from Edinburgh to the Deansgate plant in Manchester in 1968 and, for a while, ''[[The Sunday People|The People]]'' was also printed on the ''Mail'' presses in Deansgate. In 1987, printing at Deansgate ended, and the northern editions were thereafter printed at other [[Associated Newspapers]] plants.
For a time in the early 20th century, the paper championed vigorously against the "[[Yellow Peril]]", warning of the alleged dangers said to be posted by Chinese immigration to the United Kingdom.{{sfn|Braber|2020|p=75}} The "Yellow Peril" theme came to be abandoned because the Anglo-German naval race led to a more plausible threat to the British empire to be presented.{{sfn|Braber|2020|p=75}} In common with other Conservative papers, the ''Daily Mail'' used the Anglo-German naval race as a way of criticising the Liberal governments that were in power from 1906 onward, claiming that the Liberals were too pusillanimous in their response to the Tirpitz plan.
Line 58 ⟶ 59:
Before the outbreak of the [[First World War]], the paper was accused of warmongering when it reported that Germany was planning to crush the [[British Empire]].<ref name=":1" />{{rp|29}} When war began, Northcliffe's call for [[conscription]] was seen by some as controversial, although he was vindicated when conscription was introduced in 1916.<ref name="Ref_c">''The New York Times'' Current History 1917, New York Times Company, 1917 p. 211</ref> On 21 May 1915, Northcliffe criticised [[Horatio Kitchener|Lord Kitchener]], the [[Secretary of State for War]], regarding weapons and munitions. Kitchener was considered by some to be a national hero. The paper's circulation dropped from 1,386,000 to 238,000. Fifteen hundred members of the [[London Stock Exchange]] burned unsold copies and called for a boycott of the Harmsworth Press. Prime Minister [[H. H. Asquith]] accused the paper of being disloyal to the country.
When Kitchener died, the ''Mail'' reported it as a great stroke of luck for the British Empire.<ref name=":1">{{cite book |last=Temple |first=Mick |title=The British Press |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0SlqZYaWNuQC |url-status=live |publisher=McGraw-Hill Education (UK) |date=2008 |access-date=4 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220217075128/https://books.google.com/books?id=0SlqZYaWNuQC |archive-date=17 February 2022 |isbn=978-0-335-22297-1}}</ref>{{rp|32}} The paper was critical of Asquith's conduct of the war, and he resigned on 5 December 1916.<ref name="Jocelyn2003">{{cite book |last=Hunt |first=Jocelyn |title=Britain, 1846–1919 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dr_JtG9-4DMC |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2003 |page=368 |isbn=978-0-415-25707-7}}</ref> His successor [[David Lloyd George]] asked Northcliffe to be in his cabinet, hoping it would prevent him from criticising the government. Northcliffe declined.<ref name="Tom1950">{{cite
According to [[Piers Brendon]]:
Line 67 ⟶ 68:
====1919–1930====
[[File:The_Makings_of_a_Modern_Newspaper-_the_Production_of_'The_Daily_Mail'_in_Wartime,_London,_UK,_1944_D20463.jpg|thumb|left|Bundles of newspapers loaded into the back of a ''Daily Mail'' van in the early hours for delivery to newsagents in 1944]]
Light-hearted stunts enlivened Northcliffe, such as the 'Hat campaign' in the winter of 1920. This was a contest with a prize of £100 for a new design of hat – a subject in which Northcliffe took a particular interest. There were 40,000 entries and the winner was a cross between a [[top hat]] and a [[bowler hat|bowler]] christened the ''Daily Mail Sandringham Hat''. The paper subsequently promoted the wearing of it but without much success.<ref name="Paul1972">{{cite book
In 1919, [[Transatlantic flight of Alcock and Brown|Alcock and Brown]] made the first flight across the Atlantic, winning a prize of £10,000 from the ''Daily Mail''. In 1930 the ''Mail'' made a great story of another aviation stunt, awarding another prize of £10,000 to [[Amy Johnson]] for making the first solo flight from England to Australia.<ref name="Charles1968">{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3dgOAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA239|page=239|title=Britain between the wars, 1918–1940|first=Charles Loch|last=Mowat|author-link=C. L. Mowat|isbn=978-0-416-29510-8|year=1968|publisher=Methuen|access-date=10 November 2020|archive-date=4 September 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140904162151/http://books.google.com/books?id=3dgOAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA239|url-status=live}}</ref>
The ''Daily Mail'' had begun the [[Ideal Home Exhibition]] in 1908. At first, Northcliffe had disdained this as a publicity stunt to sell advertising and he refused to attend. But his wife exerted pressure upon him and he changed his view, becoming more supportive. By 1922 the editorial side of the paper was fully engaged in promoting the benefits of modern appliances and technology to free its female readers from the drudgery of housework.<ref name="Adrian2004">{{cite book
In the [[Chanak Crisis]] of 1922, Britain almost went to war with Turkey. The Prime Minister [[David Lloyd George]], supported by the War Secretary [[Winston Churchill]], were determined to go to war over the Turkish demand that the British leave their occupation zone with Churchill sending out telegrams asking for Canada, Australia and New Zealand to all send troops for the expected war. [[George Ward Price]], the "extra-special correspondent" of ''The Daily Mail'' was sympathetic towards the beleaguered British garrison at Chanak, but was also sympathetic towards the Turks.{{sfn|Mango|2009|p=143}} Ward Price wrote in his articles that Mustafa Kemal did not have wider ambitions to restore the lost frontiers of the Ottoman Empire and only wanted the Allies to leave Asia Minor.{{sfn|Mango|2009|p=143}} The ''Daily Mail'' ran a huge banner headline on 21 September 1922 that stated "Get Out Of Chanak!"{{sfn|Mango|2009|p=143}} In a leader (editorial), the ''Daily Mail'' wrote that the views of Churchill
Rothermere had a fundamentally elitist conception of politics, believing that the natural leaders of Britain were [[upper class]] men like himself, and he strongly disapproved of the decision to grant women the right to vote together with the end of the franchise requirements that disfranchised lower-class men.{{sfn|Pugh|2013|p=40}} Feeling that British women and lower-class men were not really capable of understanding the issues, Rothermere started to lose faith in democracy.{{sfn|Pugh|2013|p=40}} In October 1922, the ''Daily Mail'' approved of the Fascist "[[March on Rome]]" as the newspaper argued that democracy had failed in Italy, thus requiring [[Benito Mussolini]] to set up his Fascist dictatorship to save the social order.{{sfn|Pugh|2013|p=40}} In 1923, Rothermere published a leader in ''The Daily Mail'' entitled "What Europe Owes Mussolini", where he wrote about his "profound admiration" for Mussolini, whom he praised for "in saving Italy he stopped the inroads of Bolshevism which would
On 25 October 1924, the ''Daily Mail'' published the [[Zinoviev letter]], which indicated Moscow was directing British Communists toward violent revolution. It was later proven to be a hoax. At the time many on the left blamed the letter for the defeat of [[Ramsay MacDonald]]'s [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] in the [[1924 United Kingdom general election|1924 general election]], held four days later.<ref name="Nicholson2009">{{cite book|title=Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization|author=Nicholson Baker|year=2009|page=[https://archive.org/details/humansmokebeginn00bake/page/12 12]|isbn=978-1-4165-6784-4|url=https://archive.org/details/humansmokebeginn00bake/page/12}}</ref>
Line 100 ⟶ 101:
Rothermere and the ''Mail'' were also editorially sympathetic to [[Oswald Mosley]] and the [[British Union of Fascists]].<ref name="britishpapers">{{cite web|url=http://www.britishpapers.co.uk/midmarket/daily-mail/|title=Daily Mail|date=14 April 2014|website=British Newspapers Online|access-date=4 November 2008|archive-date=3 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210303023339/https://www.britishpapers.co.uk/midmarket/daily-mail/|url-status=live}}</ref> Rothermere wrote an article titled "Hurrah for the Blackshirts" published in the ''Daily Mail'' on 15 January 1934, praising Mosley for his "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine",<ref>{{cite book|title=Culture of the Europeans: From 1800 to the Present|first=Donald|last=Sassoon|date=2006|publisher=HarperCollins|page=1062}}</ref> and pointing out that: "Young men may join the British Union of Fascists by writing to the Headquarters, King's Road, Chelsea, London, S.W."<ref>{{cite book|title=The newspaper game: The political sociology of the press : an inquiry into behind-the-scenes organization, financing and brainwashing techniques of the news media|first=Paul|last=Hoch|year=1974|page=52|publisher=Calder & Boyars |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=v4hZAAAAMAAJ|isbn=978-0-7145-0857-3|access-date=29 June 2015|archive-date=5 October 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151005120933/https://books.google.com/books?id=v4hZAAAAMAAJ|url-status=live}}</ref> ''[[The Spectator]]'' condemned Rothermere's article commenting that, "... the Blackshirts, like the ''Daily Mail'', appeal to people unaccustomed to thinking. The average ''Daily Mail'' reader is a potential Blackshirt ready made. When Lord Rothermere tells his clientele to go and join the Fascists some of them pretty certainly will."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/19th-january-1934/6/lord-rothermeres-hurrah-for-the-blackshirts-articl|title=A Spectator's Notebook|work=The Spectator|date=19 January 1934|page=6|access-date=5 October 2013|archive-date=12 October 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131012142148/http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/19th-january-1934/6/lord-rothermeres-hurrah-for-the-blackshirts-articl|url-status=live}}</ref> In April 1934, the ''Daily Mail'' ran a competition entitled "Why I Like The Blackshirts" under which it awarded one pound every week for the best letter from its readers explaining why they liked the BUF.{{sfn|Pugh|2013|p=150}} The paper's support ended after violence at a BUF rally in Kensington Olympia in June 1934.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Blamires|first1=Cyprian|editor1-last=Jackson|editor1-first=Paul|editor2-last=Blamires|editor2-first=Cyprian|title=World Fascism: A Historical Encyclopedia (Volume 1)|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nvD2rZSVau4C&pg=PA435|date=2006|publisher=ABC-CLIO|isbn=978-1-57607-940-9|pages=228, 435|edition=illustrated, reprint|access-date=29 June 2015|archive-date=28 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210228190700/https://books.google.com/books?id=nvD2rZSVau4C&pg=PA435|url-status=live}}</ref> Mosley and many others thought Rothermere had responded to pressure from Jewish businessmen who it was believed had threatened to stop advertising in the paper if it continued to back an anti-Semitic party.<ref>{{cite book|title=Mosley|first=Nigel|last=Jones|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xxGSpXjUcvEC&pg=PA94|year=2004|page=92|isbn=978-1-904341-09-3|access-date=10 November 2020|archive-date=17 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220217075454/https://books.google.com/books?id=xxGSpXjUcvEC&pg=PA94|url-status=live}}</ref> The paper editorially continued to oppose the arrival of Jewish refugees escaping Germany, describing their arrival as "a problem to which the ''Daily Mail'' has repeatedly pointed."<ref name="We've been here before">{{cite web|last1=Karpf|first1=Anne|title=We've been here before|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/jun/08/immigration.immigrationandpublicservices|website=The Guardian|date=8 June 2002|access-date=31 July 2015|archive-date=12 September 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150912122720/http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/jun/08/immigration.immigrationandpublicservices|url-status=live}}</ref>
In December 1934, Rothermere visited Berlin as the guest of Joachim von Ribbentrop.{{sfn|Crozier|1988|p=61}} During his visit, Rothermere was publicly thanked in a speech by Josef Goebbels for the ''Daily Mail''<nowiki/>'s pro-German coverage of the [[1935 Saar status referendum|Saarland referendum]], under which the people of the Saarland had the choices of voting to remain under the rule of the League of Nations, join France, or rejoin Germany.{{sfn|Crozier|1988|p=61}} In March 1935, impressed by the arguments put forward by Ribbentrop for the return of the former German colonies in Africa, Rothermere published a leader entitled "Germany Must Have Elbow Room".{{sfn|Crozier|1988|p=59}} In his leader, Rothermere argued that the [[Treaty of Versailles]] was too harsh towards the ''Reich'' and claimed that the German economy was being crippled by the loss of the German colonial empire in Africa as he argued that without African colonies to exploit that the German economic recovery from the [[Great Depression]] was fragile and shallow.{{sfn|Crozier|1988|p=59}}
During the [[Spanish Civil War]], the ''Daily Mail'' ran a photo-essay on 27 July 1936 by Ferdinand Touchy entitled "The Red Carmens, the women who burn churches".{{sfn|Brothers|2013|p=87}} Touchy took a series of photographs of Spanish women who joined the Worker's Militia marching up to the front with rifles and ammunition pouches over their shoulders.{{sfn|Brothers|2013|p=87}} In an essay that has been widely criticised as misogynistic, Touchy wrote: "The Spanish women has been a creature to admire or make work domestically, to marry or let slip away into a religious order...65 percent were illiterate".{{sfn|Brothers|2013|p=88}} Touchy declared his horror at the young Spanish women had rejected the traditional patriarchal system, writing with disgust that the "direct action girls" of the Worker's Militia do not want to be like their mothers, submissive and obedient to men.{{sfn|Brothers|2013|p=88}} Touchy called these young women "Red Carmens", associating them with the destructive heroine of the opera ''[[Carmen]]'' and with Communism, writing the "Red Carmens" proved the amorality of the Spanish Republic, which had preached gender equality.{{sfn|Brothers|2013|p=88}} For Touchy, women to fight in a war was to reject their femininity, leading him to label these women as monstrous as he accused the "Red Carmens" of "sexual depravity", writing with utter horror at the possibility of these women engaging in premarital sex, which for him marked the beginning of the end of "civilisation" itself.{{sfn|Brothers|2013|pp=89–90}} The British historian Caroline Brothers wrote that Touchy's article said much about the gender politics of ''The Daily Mail'', which ran his photo-essay and presumably of ''The Daily Mail'''s readers who were expected to approve of the article.{{sfn|Brothers|2013|p=90}}
Line 120 ⟶ 121:
In late 2013, the paper moved its London printing operation from the city's Docklands area to a new £50 million plant in [[Thurrock]], Essex.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2012/jun/27/dmgt-britishlandcompany?newsfeed=true |newspaper=The Guardian |first=Roy |last=Greenslade |title=Daily Mail print plant sold off |date=27 June 2012 |location=London |access-date=11 December 2016 |archive-date=12 May 2017 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20170512073958/https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2012/jun/27/dmgt-britishlandcompany?newsfeed=true |url-status=live }}</ref> There are Scottish editions of both the ''Daily Mail'' and ''Mail on Sunday'', with different articles and columnists.
In August 2016, the ''Daily Mail'' began a partnership with ''[[People's Daily|The People's Daily]]'', the official newspaper of the [[Chinese Communist Party]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Allen |first1=Kerry |title=Daily Mail deal with Communist mouthpiece raises few eyebrows in China |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-37088736 |access-date=16 August 2016 |work=BBC News |date=15 August 2016 |archive-date=15 August 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160815180211/http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-37088736 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Graham-Harrison |first1=Emma |title=Mail Online teams up with Chinese newspaper the People's Daily |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/aug/12/mail-online-teams-up-chinese-newspaper-peoples-daily |access-date=16 August 2016 |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=12 August 2016 |archive-date=12 May 2017 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20170512073312/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/aug/12/mail-online-teams-up-chinese-newspaper-peoples-daily |url-status=live }}</ref> This partnership included publishing articles in the MailOnline produced by The People's Daily. The agreement appeared to observers to give the paper an edge in publishing news stories sourced out of China, but it also led to questions of [[censorship]] regarding politically sensitive topics.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Greenslade |first1=Roy |title=What is Mail Online doing in partnership with the People's Daily of China? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/aug/12/mail-online-goes-into-partnership-with-the-peoples-daily-of-china |access-date=16 August 2016 |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=12 August 2016 |archive-date=12 May 2017 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20170512074117/https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/aug/12/mail-online-goes-into-partnership-with-the-peoples-daily-of-china |url-status=live }}</ref>
In November 2016, [[Lego]] ended a series of promotions in the paper which had run for years, following a campaign from the group '[[Stop Funding Hate]]', who were unhappy with the ''Mail'''s coverage of migrant issues and the EU referendum.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37962425|title=Lego promotions with Daily Mail end for 'foreseeable future' – BBC News|date=12 November 2016|work=[[BBC Online]]|access-date=12 November 2016|archive-date=12 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161112173741/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37962425|url-status=live}}</ref> In September 2017, the ''Daily Mail'' partnered with [[Stage 29 Productions]] to launch DailyMailTV, an international news program produced by Stage 29 Productions in its studios based in New York City with satellite studios in London, Sydney, DC and Los Angeles.<ref>{{cite news|title=ESPN's Jesse Palmer to Host 'DailyMailTV'|url=https://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/espns-jesse-palmer-host-dailymailtv-167874|last=Albiniak|first=Paige|date=14 August 2017|magazine=[[Broadcasting & Cable]]|access-date=2 January 2019|archive-date=3 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190103110226/https://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/espns-jesse-palmer-host-dailymailtv-167874|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="dailymailtv">{{cite web|title=About DailyMailTV|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/dailymailtv/about/article-4875938/About-DailyMailTV.html|website=Mail Online|date=12 September 2017|access-date=2 January 2019|archive-date=1 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401211125/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/dailymailtv/about/article-4875938/About-DailyMailTV.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Dr. [[Phil McGraw]] (Stage 29 Productions) was named as executive producer.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Petroff |first1=Alanna |title=Dr. Phil's newest TV show: DailyMailTV |url=https://money.cnn.com/2017/04/04/media/tv-dailymailtv-dr-phil/index.html |access-date=27 August 2019 |agency=CNNMoney (London) |work=CNN|date=4 April 2017 |archive-date=28 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190828000921/https://money.cnn.com/2017/04/04/media/tv-dailymailtv-dr-phil/index.html |url-status=live }}</ref> The program was nominated for a [[Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Entertainment News Program]] in 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cdn.emmyonline.org/day_45th_nominations.pdf|title=The 45th Annual Daytime Emmy Awards Nominations|website=Emmy Online|access-date=27 August 2019|year=2018|archive-date=22 March 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180322081954/http://cdn.emmyonline.org/day_45th_nominations.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>
Line 126 ⟶ 129:
In May 2020, the ''Daily Mail'' ended ''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun's]]'' 42-year reign as the United Kingdom's highest-circulation newspaper. The ''Daily Mail'' recorded average daily sales of 980,000 copies, with the ''Mail on Sunday'' recording weekly sales of 878,000.<ref name="Sweney"/>
In August 2022, the ''Daily Mail'' wrote in support of [[Liz Truss]] in the [[July–September 2022 Conservative Party leadership election]],<ref>{{cite news |date= 2 August 2022
==Scottish, Irish, Continental, and Indian editions==
Line 132 ⟶ 135:
===''Scottish Daily Mail''===
[[File:Scottish Daily Mail masthead.jpg|thumb|The ''Scottish Daily Mail'' header]]
The ''Scottish Daily Mail'' was published as a separate title from [[Edinburgh]]<ref name="Ref_1947">{{cite journal|title=Parliamentary papers|page=94 Great Britain Parliament House of Commons|year=1947}}</ref> starting in December 1946. The circulation was poor though, falling to below 100,000 and the operation was rebased to [[Manchester]] in December 1968.<ref name="James1989">{{cite book|title=The Scottish
===''Irish Daily Mail''===
Line 139 ⟶ 142:
===''Continental'' and ''Overseas Daily Mail''===
Two foreign editions were begun in 1904 and 1905; the former titled the ''Overseas Daily Mail'', covering the world, and the latter titled the ''Continental Daily Mail'', covering Europe and North Africa.<ref name="
===''Mail Today''===
Line 148 ⟶ 151:
As a [[Right-wing politics|right-wing]] tabloid,<ref name="Gaber">{{cite journal|first1=Ivor|last1=Gaber|title=The 'Othering' of 'Red Ed', or How the Daily Mail 'Framed' the British Labour Leader|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-923X.12114|journal=The Political Quarterly|date=2014|issn=1467-923X|pages=471–479|volume=85|issue=4|doi=10.1111/1467-923X.12114|access-date=12 November 2020|archive-date=12 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112185326/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-923X.12114|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Stoegner">{{cite journal|first1=Karin|last1=Stoegner|first2=Ruth|last2=Wodak|title='The man who hated Britain' – the discursive construction of 'national unity' in the Daily Mail|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2015.1103764|journal=Critical Discourse Studies|date=14 March 2016|issn=1740-5904|pages=193–209|volume=13|issue=2|doi=10.1080/17405904.2015.1103764|s2cid=147469921}}</ref><ref name="Meyer">{{cite journal|first1=Anneke|last1=Meyer|title=Too Drunk To Say No|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/14680770903457071|journal=Feminist Media Studies|date=1 March 2010|issn=1468-0777|pages=19–34|volume=10|issue=1|doi=10.1080/14680770903457071|s2cid=142036919|access-date=12 November 2020|archive-date=17 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220217075456/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14680770903457071|url-status=live}}</ref> the ''Mail'' is traditionally a supporter of the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]]. It has endorsed the party in every UK general election since 1945, with the one exception of the [[October 1974 United Kingdom general election|October 1974 UK general election]], where it endorsed a Liberal and Conservative coalition.<ref>{{cite news |date= 4 May 2010 |title= Newspaper support in UK general elections |url= https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/may/04/general-election-newspaper-support |work= The Guardian |access-date= 22 November 2021 |archive-date= 1 August 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130801141949/http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/may/04/general-election-newspaper-support |url-status= live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Martinson |first= Jane |date= 6 May 2015 |title= The Sun serves Ed Miliband a last helping of abuse |url= https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/sun-ed-miliband-labour-mail-telegraph-election |work= The Guardian |access-date= 22 November 2021 |archive-date= 22 November 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20211122163339/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/sun-ed-miliband-labour-mail-telegraph-election |url-status= live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= McKee |first= Ruth |date= 3 June 2017 |title= Which parties are the UK press backing in the general election? |url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/03/which-parties-are-the-uk-press-backing-in-the-general-election |work= The Guardian |access-date= 22 November 2021 |archive-date= 16 November 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20211116190123/https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/03/which-parties-are-the-uk-press-backing-in-the-general-election |url-status= live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Mayhew |first= Freddy |date= 9 December 2019 |title= What the papers say about the 2019 general election |url= https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/what-the-papers-say-about-the-2019-general-election/ |work= Press Gazette |access-date= 22 November 2021 |archive-date= 22 November 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20211122163341/https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/what-the-papers-say-about-the-2019-general-election/ |url-status= live }}</ref> While the paper retained its support for the Conservative Party at the [[2015 United Kingdom general election|2015 general election]], the paper urged conservatively inclined voters to support [[UKIP]] in the constituencies of [[Heywood and Middleton]], [[Dudley North (UK Parliament constituency)|Dudley North]], and [[Great Grimsby (UK Parliament constituency)|Great Grimsby]] where UKIP was the main challenger to the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]].{{citation needed|date=December 2018}}
The ''Daily Mail'' endorsed voting leave in the [[2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum]].<ref>David A.L. Levy, Billur Aslan, Diego Bironzo. [https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2018-11/UK_Press_Coverage_of_the_%20EU_Referendum.pdf "Press coverage of the EU referendum"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230604223350/https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2018-11/UK_Press_Coverage_of_the_%20EU_Referendum.pdf |date=4 June 2023 }}. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, 8 September 2016.</ref>
==Awards==
Line 178 ⟶ 181:
* "News Reporter of the Year" (Tom Kelly; jointly with Claire Newell of The Daily Telegraph, 2019)
Other awards include:
* "National Political/Government Reporting" (
* "[[Orwell Prize]]" ([[Toby Harnden]], 2012)
* "[[Hugh Cudlipp]] Award" (2012; Stephen Wright/Richard Pendlebury, 2009; 2007)<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/blog/2012/mar/20/press-awards-2012-live|newspaper=The Guardian|first1=Lisa|last1=O'Carroll|first2=Dan|last2=Sabbagh|title=Press Awards 2012 as they happened|date=20 March 2012|location=London|access-date=11 December 2016|archive-date=8 January 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170108095520/https://www.theguardian.com/media/blog/2012/mar/20/press-awards-2012-live|url-status=live}}</ref>
Line 209 ⟶ 212:
===Cannabis use===
On 13 June 2011, a study by
In October 2011, the ''Daily Mail'' printed an article citing the research, titled "Just ONE cannabis joint can bring on schizophrenia as well as damaging memory." The group [[Cannabis Law Reform]] (CLEAR), which campaigns for ending drug prohibition, criticised the ''Daily Mail'' report.<ref name="clear-uk1">{{cite web |url=http://clear-uk.org/the-daily-mail-addicted-to-lies-and-misinformation-about-cannabis/ |title=The Daily Mail – Addicted To Lies And Misinformation About Cannabis |work=Clear-uk |access-date=12 March 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120323115419/http://clear-uk.org/the-daily-mail-addicted-to-lies-and-misinformation-about-cannabis |archive-date=23 March 2012 }}</ref>
===Ralph Miliband article===
Line 241 ⟶ 244:
In July 2018, the [[Independent Press Standards Organisation]] ordered the paper to publish a front-page correction after finding the newspaper had breached rules on accuracy in its reporting of the case. The ''Daily Mail'' reported that a major internal investigation was conducted following the decision to publish the story, and as a result, "strongly worded disciplinary notes were sent to seven senior members of staff", which made it clear "that if errors of the same nature were to happen again, their careers would be at risk".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jul/27/daily-mail-publishes-front-page-apology-over-iraqi-bomb-claim|title=Daily Mail publishes front-page apology over Iraqi bomb claim|last=Waterson|first=Jim|date=27 July 2018|website=The Guardian|language=en|access-date=27 July 2018|archive-date=27 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180727184414/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jul/27/daily-mail-publishes-front-page-apology-over-iraqi-bomb-claim|url-status=live}}</ref>
=== Doctored image of Korean soldiers in Ukraine ===
On December 4, 2024, the ''Daily Mail'' published an online story about the [[Russo-Ukrainian War]] under the headline “Kim Jong Un sends North Korean women to fight as cannon fodder for Putin in Ukraine”.<ref name="atsb">{{cite news |last1=Bryen |first1=Stephen |title=Fake story, fake photo of alleged North Korean women in Kursk |url=https://asiatimes.com/2024/12/fake-story-fake-photo-of-alleged-north-korean-women-in-kursk/ |access-date=December 5, 2024 |work=[[Asia Times]] |date=December 5, 2024}}</ref> The story was accompanied by a photo of what appeared to be two Korean women in combat fatigues.<ref name="atsb"/><ref name="mite"/> It was later revealed that the photo was an older image of two Russian soldiers whose facial features had been doctored to appear Korean.<ref name="atsb"/> According to ''[[Mediaite]]'', the ''Daily Mail'' "received backlash and ridicule on social media before it removed the article and issued a correction notice".<ref name="mite">{{cite news |last1=Nash |first1=Charlie |title=Daily Mail Apologizes After Publishing Photoshopped Image of ‘North Korean Women’ Fighting in Ukraine |url=https://www.mediaite.com/news/daily-mail-apologizes-after-publishing-photoshopped-image-of-north-korean-women-fighting-in-ukraine/ |access-date=December 5, 2024 |work=[[Mediaite]] |date=December 4, 2024}}</ref>
==Libel lawsuits==
Line 250 ⟶ 256:
* 2003, October: Actress [[Diana Rigg]] was awarded £30,000 in damages over a story commenting on aspects of her personality.<ref name="Ref_l">Ciar Byrne [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2003/oct/20/associatednewspapers.privacy Rigg wins case against Associated] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110113195613/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/oct/20/associatednewspapers.privacy |date=13 January 2011 }}, 20 October 2003, ''The Guardian''</ref>
* 2006, May: Musician [[Elton John]] received £100,000 damages following false accusations concerning his manners and behaviour.<ref name="Ref_k">Jacqueline Maley, [https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/may/25/pressandpublishing.media Elton John gets £100,000 for Daily Mail libel] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120603125943/http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/may/25/pressandpublishing.media|date=3 June 2012}}, 25 May 2006, ''[[The Guardian]]''<!--accessed 31-August-2009--></ref>
* 2009, January: £30,000 award to
* 2010, July: £47,500 award to Parameswaran Subramanyam for falsely claiming that he secretly sustained himself with hamburgers during a 23-day hunger strike in Parliament Square to draw attention to the [[protests against the Sri Lankan Civil War]] in 2009.<ref name="Ref_i">[https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/jul/29/daily-mail-sun-parameswaran-subramanyam Daily Mail and Sun pay out to Tamil hunger striker] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130709140327/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jul/29/daily-mail-sun-parameswaran-subramanyam |date=9 July 2013 }}, 29 July 2010, ''The Guardian''</ref>
* 2011, November: the former lifestyle adviser [[Carole Caplin]] received damages over claims in the ''Mail'' that she would reveal intimate details about former clients.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15537612 "Blair adviser Carole Caplin wins Daily Mail libel damages"] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120303211645/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15537612 |date=3 March 2012 }}, BBC News, 1 November 2011</ref>
* 2014, May: Author [[J. K. Rowling]] received "substantial damages" and the ''Mail'' printed an apology. The newspaper had made a false claim about Rowling's story written for the website of [[Gingerbread (charity)|Gingerbread]], a single parents' charity.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27312080 |title=Daily Mail pays damages to JK Rowling |work=BBC News |publisher=BBC |date=7 May 2014 |access-date=7 May 2014 |archive-date=18 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200318014908/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27312080 |url-status=live }}</ref>
* 2017, April: [[First Lady of the United States]], [[Melania Trump]], received an undisclosed settlement over claims in the ''Mail'' that she had worked as an escort in the 1990s.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39575680|title=Melania Trump wins damages from Daily Mail over 'escort' allegation|date=12 April 2017|work=BBC News|access-date=12 April 2017|archive-date=12 April 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170412100201/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39575680|url-status=live}}</ref> In September 2016, she began litigation against the ''Daily Mail'' for an article which discussed escort allegations. The article included rebuttals and said that there was no evidence to support the allegations. The ''Mail'' regretted any misinterpretation that could have come from reading the article, and retracted it from its website.<ref>{{cite news|title=Melania Trump: A retraction|url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3769798/Melania-Trump-retraction.html|access-date=9 November 2016|work=Daily Mail|date=1 September 2016|archive-date=9 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161109223234/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3769798/Melania-Trump-retraction.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Melania Trump filed a lawsuit in Maryland, suing for $150 million.<ref>{{cite news|title=Melania Trump sues Daily Mail and US blogger for $150m over sex worker claims|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37253025|access-date=9 November 2016|work=BBC News|date=2 September 2016|archive-date=10 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161110043334/http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37253025|url-status=live}}</ref> On 7 February 2017, the lawsuit was re-filed in the correct jurisdiction, New York, where the ''Daily Mail''{{'}}s parent company has offices, seeking damages of at least $150 million.<ref>{{Cite news|date=7 February 2017|title=Melania Trump re-files Daily Mail lawsuit over 'lost business opportunities'|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38898530|access-date=9 December 2020|archive-date=6 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506234801/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38898530|url-status=live}}</ref>
* 2018, June: [[Charles Spencer, 9th Earl Spencer|Earl Spencer]] accepted undisclosed libel damages from Associated Newspapers over a claim that he acted in an "unbrotherly, heartless and callous way" towards his sister [[Diana, Princess of Wales]].<ref name="Lawyer 2018">{{cite web | last=Lawyer | first=PA Media | title=Earl Spencer wins libel damages from Daily Mail publisher over claim he was 'unbrotherly' towards Princess Diana after her 'marriage collapsed' | website=Press Gazette | date=
* 2019, June: Associated Newspapers paid £120,000 in damages plus costs to [[Interpal]], a UK-based charity which the ''Mail'' falsely accused of funding a "hate festival" in Palestine which acted out the murder of Jews.<ref name="Weaver 2019">{{cite web | last=Weaver | first=Matthew | title=Daily Mail pays charity damages over 'hate festival' allegations | website=The Guardian | date=
* 2020, November: The ''Mail'' agreed to pay libel damages of £25,000 and apologised for distress caused to [[University of Cambridge]] professor [[Priyamvada Gopal]], who they had falsely claimed "was attempting to incite an aggressive and potentially violent race war".<ref name="Vides 2021">{{cite web | last=Vides | first=Gaby | title=Daily Mail apologies and pays £25,000 in damages to Professor Gopal over "false" racism allegations | website=Varsity Online | date=4 October 2021
* 2020, December: The ''Mail'' paid businessman [[James Dyson]] and his wife Lady Deirdre Dyson £100,000 in libel damages after suggesting they had behaved badly towards their former housekeeper.<ref name="Tobitt 2020">{{cite web | last=Tobitt | first=Charlotte | title=Daily Mail pays out £100,000 to Sir James Dyson over misreporting of row with housekeeper | website=Press Gazette | date=
* 2021, January: Associated Newspapers paid damages and apologised to a British Pakistani couple about whom they had made false allegations in relation to their work as counter-extremism experts.<ref name="Shah 2021">{{cite web | last=Shah | first=Murtaza Ali | title=British-Pakistani cage fighter and wife win defamation case in UK – World | website=Geo.tv | date=
* 2021, May: Associated Newspapers paid substantial damages and apologised after revealing the identity of a complainant in a rape case against film director [[Luc Besson]].<ref name="Gentleman 2021">{{cite web | last=Gentleman | first=Amelia | title=Associated Newspapers pays damages for revealing Sand Van Roy as Luc Besson accuser | website=The Guardian | date=
===Unsuccessful lawsuits===
Line 284 ⟶ 290:
===Reliability===
The ''Daily Mail''{{'}}s medical and science journalism has been criticised by some doctors and scientists, accusing it of using minor studies to generate scare stories or being misleading.<ref name="Bad science">{{cite book|last1=Goldacre|first1=Ben|title=Bad science|date=2008|publisher=Fourth Estate|location=London|isbn=9780007240197}}<!-- can we add quotes and/or page numbers from this book? --></ref><ref name="The Daily Mail cancer story that torpedoes itself in paragraph 19">{{cite web|last1=Goldacre|first1=Ben|title=The Daily Mail cancer story that torpedoes itself in paragraph 19|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/oct/16/ben-goldacre-bad-science-daily-mail-cancer|website=The Guardian|date=16 October 2010|access-date=1 August 2015|archive-date=22 October 2016|archive-url=https://archive.today/20161022122020/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/oct/16/ben-goldacre-bad-science-daily-mail-cancer|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="NHS autism">{{cite web|url=https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/kids-grow-out-of-autism-claim-unfounded/|title='Kids grow out of autism' claim unfounded|author=[[National Health Service|NHS]]|date=22 February 2012|access-date=1 August 2020|quote=Can some children simply "grow out" of autism? The Daily Mail certainly thinks so, and today reported that new research by a "prestigious American university" claims that "not only is this possible, it's also common." The Mail's claim is misleading and may offer a false impression to the parents of children with autism.|archive-date=5 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805135635/https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/kids-grow-out-of-autism-claim-unfounded/|url-status=dead}}</ref> In 2011, the ''Daily Mail'' published an article titled "Just ONE cannabis joint 'can cause psychiatric episodes similar to schizophrenia' as well as damaging memory".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2053486/cannabis-joint-cause-psychiatric-episodes-similar-schizophrenia-damaging-memory.html|title=Just ONE cannabis joint 'can cause psychiatric episodes similar to schizophrenia' as well as damaging memory|first=Tamara|last=Cohen|date=25 October 2011|website=Mail Online|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=11 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111210736/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2053486/cannabis-joint-cause-psychiatric-episodes-similar-schizophrenia-damaging-memory.html|url-status=live}}</ref>
[[Carbon Brief]] complained to the [[Press Complaints Commission]] about an article published in the ''Daily Mail'' titled "Hidden green tax in fuel bills: How a £200 stealth charge is slipped on to your gas and electricity bills" because the £200 figure was unexplained, unreferenced and, according to [[Office of Gas and Electricity Markets|Ofgem]], incorrect. The ''Daily Mail'' quietly removed the article from their website.<ref name="Daily Mail prints correction over GWPF green tax claims">{{cite web|url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-mail-prints-correction-over-gwpf-green-tax-claims|title=Daily Mail prints correction over GWPF green tax claims|date=7 September 2011|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809105919/https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-mail-prints-correction-over-gwpf-green-tax-claims|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="daily mail confused">{{cite web|url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-mail-confused-over-whether-green-tax-cost-is-85-or-300-as-mail-on-sunday-uses-gwpf-200-figure-despite-pcc-ruling|title=Daily Mail confused over whether 'green tax' cost is £85 or £300 as Mail on Sunday uses GWPF £200 figure despite PCC ruling|date=19 September 2011|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809052336/https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-mail-confused-over-whether-green-tax-cost-is-85-or-300-as-mail-on-sunday-uses-gwpf-200-figure-despite-pcc-ruling|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Carbon Brief The Press Complaints Commission and the Daily Mail">{{cite web|url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/carbon-brief-the-press-complaints-commission-and-the-daily-mail|title=Carbon Brief The Press Complaints Commission and the Daily Mail|date=3 October 2011|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809055816/https://www.carbonbrief.org/carbon-brief-the-press-complaints-commission-and-the-daily-mail|url-status=live}}</ref>
In 2013, the [[Met Office]] criticised an article about climate change in the ''Daily Mail'' by [[James Delingpole]] for containing "a series of factual inaccuracies".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2013/01/10/addressing-the-daily-mail-and-james-delingpoles-crazy-climate-change-obsession-article/|title=Addressing the Daily Mail and James Delingpole's 'crazy climate change obsession' article|author=Met Office Press Office|date=10 January 2013|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809022242/https://blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2013/01/10/addressing-the-daily-mail-and-james-delingpoles-crazy-climate-change-obsession-article/|url-status=live}}</ref> The ''Daily Mail'' in response published a letter from the Met Office chairman on its letters page, as well as offering to append the letter to Delingpole's article.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2013/03/08/setting-the-record-straight-in-the-daily-mail/|title=Setting the record straight in the Daily Mail|author=Met Office Press Office|newspaper=Official Blog of the Met Office News Team |date=8 March 2013|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809062704/https://blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2013/03/08/setting-the-record-straight-in-the-daily-mail/|url-status=live}}</ref>
In August 2018, the ''Mail Online'' deleted a lengthy news article titled "Powder Keg Paris" by journalist Andrew Malone which focused on "illegal migrants" living in the Paris suburb of Saint Denis, after a string of apparent inaccuracies were highlighted on social media by French activist Marwan Muhammad, including mistaking Saint-Denis, the city, for [[Seine-Saint-Denis]], the department northeast of Paris. Local councillor Majid Messaoudene said that the article had set out to "stigmatise" and "harm" the area and its people. The journalist, Andrew Malone, subsequently deleted his Twitter account.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/06/daily-mail-removes-powder-keg-paris-report-after-complaints|title=Daily Mail removes 'Powder Keg Paris' report after complaints|last=Waterson|first=Jim|date=6 August 2018|work=The Guardian|language=en|access-date=6 September 2018|archive-date=5 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180905204604/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/06/daily-mail-removes-powder-keg-paris-report-after-complaints|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/06/daily-mail-removes-powder-keg-paris-report-after-complaints|title=Mail Online Deleted An Article About "Illegal Migrants" Overwhelming A Paris Suburb|last=Smith|first=Patrick|date=6 August 2018|work=The Guardian|language=en|access-date=6 September 2018|archive-date=5 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180905204604/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/06/daily-mail-removes-powder-keg-paris-report-after-complaints|url-status=live}}</ref> In 2019, the [[Independent Press Standards Organisation|IPSO]] ruled against the ''Daily Mail'' and confirmed in its ruling that the article was inaccurate.<ref name="IPSO rules against Daily Mail">{{cite web|url=https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ipso-rules-against-daily-mail-in-powder-keg-paris-report-claiming-300000-illegal-migrants-lived-in-one-suburb/|title=IPSO rules against Daily Mail over report claiming 300,000 illegal migrants lived in one French suburb|author=Charlotte Tobitt|date=6 February 2019|access-date=1 August 2020|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809043355/https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ipso-rules-against-daily-mail-in-powder-keg-paris-report-claiming-300000-illegal-migrants-lived-in-one-suburb/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="IPSO ruling">{{cite web|url=https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ruling/?id=05228-18|title=05228-18 Versi v Daily Mail|date=23 January 2019|access-date=1 August 2020|quote=Decision: Breach – sanction: action as offered by publication|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809100231/https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ruling/?id=05228-18|url-status=live}}</ref>
In early 2019, the mobile version of the [[Microsoft Edge]]
==== Wikipedia determination of unreliability ====
In February 2017, pursuant to a formal community discussion, editors on the [[English Wikipedia]] banned the use of the ''Daily Mail'' as a source in most cases.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":5" /><ref name=":3" /> Its use as a reference is now "generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist",<ref name="The Guardian" /><ref name=":6" /><ref>{{cite web |last=Bowden |first=George |date=9 February 2017 |title=''Daily Mail'' Banned As 'Reliable Source' On Wikipedia in Unprecedented Move |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/daily-mail-banned-from-wikipedia_uk_589c3e13e4b07685621810f8 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170209134706/http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/daily-mail-banned-from-wikipedia_uk_589c3e13e4b07685621810f8 |archive-date=9 February 2017 |access-date=9 February 2017 |website=The Huffington Post, UK |publisher=Huffington Post |quote=The decision was made by the site's community}}</ref> and it can no longer be used as proof of [[Wikipedia:Notability|notability]].<ref name=":6" /> It can still be used in reference to an article about the ''Daily Mail'' itself.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Rodriguez |first=Ashley |date=10 February 2017 |title=In a first, Wikipedia has deemed the Daily Mail too "unreliable" to be used as a citation |url=https://qz.com/907715/in-a-first-wikipedia-has-deemed-the-daily-mail-and-mail-online-too-unreliable-to-be-used-as-a-citation/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210606080509/https://qz.com/907715/in-a-first-wikipedia-has-deemed-the-daily-mail-and-mail-online-too-unreliable-to-be-used-as-a-citation/ |archive-date=6 June 2021 |access-date=30 November 2022 |website=[[Quartz (publication)|Quartz]] |language=en}}</ref> Support for the ban centred on "the ''Daily Mail''<nowiki/>'s reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism, and flat-out fabrication".<ref name="The Guardian" /><ref name=":6" /><ref name=":5" /> Some users opposed the decision, arguing that it is "actually reliable for some subjects" and "may have been more reliable historically."<ref name=":7">{{Cite news |last=Oremus |first=Will |date=2017-02-09 |title=Wikipedia's Daily Mail Ban Is a Welcome Rebuke to Terrible Journalism |url=https://slate.com/technology/2017/02/wikipedias-daily-mail-ban-is-a-welcome-rebuke-to-terrible-journalism.html |access-date=2024-08-17 |work=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |language=en-US |issn=1091-2339}}</ref>
Wikipedia's ban of the ''Daily Mail'' generated a significant amount of media attention, especially from the British media.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |last=Harrison |first=Stephen |date=1 July 2021 |title=Wikipedia's War on the Daily Mail |url=https://slate.com/technology/2021/07/wikipedia-daily-mail-generally-unreliable.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210701131014/https://slate.com/technology/2021/07/wikipedia-daily-mail-generally-unreliable.html |archive-date=1 July 2021 |access-date=10 July 2021 |website=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |language=en}}</ref> Though the ''Daily Mail'' strongly contested this decision by the community, Wikipedia's co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] backed the community's choice, stating: "I think what [the ''Daily Mail'' has] done brilliantly in this ad funded world (is) they've mastered the art of [[Clickbait|click bait]], they've mastered the art of hyped up headlines, they've also mastered the art of, I'm sad to say, of running stories that simply aren't true. And that's why Wikipedia decided not to accept them as a source anymore. It's very problematic, they get very upset when we say this, but it's just fact."<ref>{{cite web |last=Kharpal |first=Arjun |date=19 May 2017 |title=The Daily Mail has 'mastered the art of running stories that aren't true', Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales says |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/19/daily-mail-jimmy-wales-fake-news-wikipedia-wikitribune.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615145709/https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/19/daily-mail-jimmy-wales-fake-news-wikipedia-wikitribune.html |archive-date=15 June 2020 |access-date=16 June 2020 |publisher=[[CNBC]]}}</ref> A February 2017 editorial in ''[[The Times]]'' commenting on the decision stated that "Newspapers make errors and have the responsibility to correct them. Wikipedia editors' fastidiousness, however, appears to reflect less a concern for accuracy than dislike of the ''Daily Mail''{{'}}s opinions."<ref>{{Cite news |date=10 February 2017 |title=Truth or Consequences: Fake news will not be countered by castigating legitimate journalism |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/truth-or-consequences-h6zfdj06n |url-access=limited |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201031051645/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/truth-or-consequences-h6zfdj06n |archive-date=31 October 2020 |access-date=16 October 2020 |work=The Times |page=29}}</ref> [[Slate (magazine)|''Slate'']] writer Will Oremus said the decision "should encourage more careful sourcing across Wikipedia while doubling as a richly deserved rebuke to a publication that represents some of the worst forces in online news."<ref name=":7" />
In 2018, the [[Wikipedia community]] upheld the ''Daily Mail''<nowiki/>'s deprecation as a source.<ref name=":4" />
===Racism accusations===
Line 301 ⟶ 312:
In August 2020, a group of [[Great Palm Island|Palm Islanders]] in [[Queensland]], Australia, lodged a complaint with the [[Australian Human Rights Commission]] under [[Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975|Section 18C of the ''Racial Discrimination Act 1975'']] against the ''Daily Mail'' and [[Nine News|9News]], alleging that they had broadcast and published reports that were inaccurate and racist about the [[Indigenous Australian]] recipients of compensation after the [[Palm Island Class Action]].<ref>{{cite web | title=Nine News Palm Island investigation reveals people awarded money went out and spent it | first=Amanda | last=Meade | website=The Guardian | date=22 May 2020 | url=http://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/may/22/nine-news-palm-island-investigation-reveals-people-awarded-money-went-out-and-spent-it | access-date=25 August 2020 | archive-date=24 August 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200824033319/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/may/22/nine-news-palm-island-investigation-reveals-people-awarded-money-went-out-and-spent-it | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | last=Stackpool | first=Isabelle | title=Much of $30 million compensation given after Palm Island riots was frittered away on luxury goods | website=Daily Mail Online | date=19 May 2020 | url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8333903/Much-30-million-compensation-given-Palm-Island-riots-frittered-away-luxury-goods.html | access-date=25 August 2020 | archive-date=6 August 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200806164955/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8333903/Much-30-million-compensation-given-Palm-Island-riots-frittered-away-luxury-goods.html | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=abcaug>{{cite news | title=Palm Islanders to launch action against Channel Nine, Daily Mail over 'racist' reports | first=Sofie | last=Wainwright | website=ABC News | publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation | date=20 August 2020 | url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-21/palm-islanders-accuse-nine-and-daily-mail-of-racist-reporting/12578088 | access-date=25 August 2020 | archive-date=21 August 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200821144538/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-21/palm-islanders-accuse-nine-and-daily-mail-of-racist-reporting/12578088 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=guardaug>{{cite web | title=Palm Island residents launch human rights complaint over 'racist' Channel Nine and Daily Mail reports | first=Amanda | last=Meade | website=The Guardian | date=21 August 2020 | url=http://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/aug/21/palm-island-residents-launch-human-rights-complaint-over-racist-channel-nine-and-daily-mail-reports | access-date=25 August 2020 | archive-date=25 August 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200825005840/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/aug/21/palm-island-residents-launch-human-rights-complaint-over-racist-channel-nine-and-daily-mail-reports | url-status=live }}</ref>
In 2021, IPSO ruled that
==Supplements and features==
Line 318 ⟶ 329:
* ''[[Fred Basset]]''
''Up and Running'' is a strip distributed by Knight Features and ''[[Fred Basset]]'' has followed the life of the dog of the same name in a two-part strip in the ''Daily Mail'' since 8 July 1963.<ref>{{cite news|publisher=C21 Media|title=Fred Basset is back|author=Maria Esposito|url=http://www.c21media.net/news/detail.asp?area=1&article=21463|date=
The long-running ''[[Teddy Tail]]'' cartoon strip, was first published on 5 April 1915 and was the first cartoon strip in a British newspaper.<ref name="Ref_s">Rickards, Maurice; Twyman, Michael (2000). ''The encyclopaedia of ephemera: a guide to the fragmentary documents of everyday life for the collector, curator, and historian.'' Routledge. p. 103.</ref> It ran for over 40 years to 1960, spawning the ''Teddy Tail League'' Children's Club and many annuals from 1934 to 1942 and again from 1949 to 1962. [[Teddy Tail]] was a mouse, with friends Kitty Puss (a cat), Douglas Duck and Dr. Beetle. Teddy Tail is always shown with a knot in his tail.<ref name="tt1">{{cite web|title=Concise History of the British Newspaper in the Twentieth Century|url=http://www.bl.uk/collections/brit20th.html|website=bl.uk|publisher=The British Library|access-date=29 June 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20011202142743/http://www.bl.uk/collections/brit20th.html|archive-date=2 December 2001|date=2001|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="tt2">{{cite web|last1=Cadogan|first1=Mary|title=Teddy Tail of the Daily Mail|url=http://www.gatewaymonthly.com/513teddy.html|website=Gateway Monthly|publisher=Hawk Books|access-date=29 June 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060426224355/http://www.gatewaymonthly.com/513teddy.html|archive-date=26 April 2006 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Line 331 ⟶ 342:
|title=Mail Online hits new record with 79m unique browsers
|access-date=30 December 2018
|location=London
|first=Dominic
|last=Ponsford
|archive-date=30 December 2018
|url-status=live
}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url= http://www.mediaweek.co.uk/news/1066247/MailOnline-overtakes-Huffington-Post-become-worlds-no-2/|title= MailOnline overtakes Huffington Post to become world's no 2|access-date= 18 May 2011|date= 19 April 2011|work= MediaWeek|location= London|first= Arif|last= Durrani|archive-date= 17 February 2022|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20220217075512/https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/mailonline-overtakes-huffington-post-become-worlds-no-2/1066247?src_site=mediaweek|url-status= live}}</ref> It has since then become the most visited newspaper website in the world,<ref name="bbc.co.uk">{{cite news |last=Wheeler |first=Brian |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16746785 |title=How the Daily Mail stormed the US |work=BBC News |date=27 January 2012 |access-date=23 August 2013 |archive-date=29 May 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130529110259/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16746785 |url-status=live }}</ref> with over 189.5 million visitors per month, and 11.7 million visitors daily, as of January 2014.<ref>[https://archive.today/20140224224124/http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1281725/ABCs-digital-Statistics-January-2014/ Newspaper ABCs: Digital statistics for January 2014] 20 February 2014</ref>
| |||