Still feel like voting?

[millhouses24]

Now I assume that I'm going to get ridiculed (for reasons most people aren't quite sure of) for accessing the Daily Mail's website, but I would like to hear from people who are not incensed by this. Not only the situation, but also their attitude.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1265508/Peter-Davey-gets-42-000-benefits-year-drives-Mercedes.html

 

 

I'm not incensed. I am VERY incensed about other things right now, but not that article.

 

Here's why:

 

1. I accept that there do exist people who live their lives on benefits. I am not arguing that the situation described does not occur, because I am sure it does. My issue is with the article.

 

2. The article is actually from Closer Magazine. That's a "women's" magazine. Link is http://www.closeronline.co.uk/

 

3. Standard journalistic and editing practice is to get a photo meet the family, and then write the thing themselves. The "quotes" will have nothing to do with what was actually said by the family. Do you think they actually said those words? If you listened to a recording of the "interview" I'd imagine it would have absolutely nothing to do with what was written. I personally know people who are paid to do exactly that job.

 

Look at the other "stories" on the front of the Closer magazine. I'd bet my entire shoe collection that none of the people mentioned there have ever talked to anyone from Closer about any of those issues.

 

Our libel laws are such that there if anyone wanted to sue Closer for making stuff up, they would need tonnes of money and time and if they lost would be completely screwed.

 

4. Now, I'd imagine the comeback is going to be "why would they want to make something up?".

 

Well, look at how many comments this article has received and how many views it has received. Would it have received as many if it had been "family on benefits didn't really say much about their situation"?

 

There are some phrases which tend to get a lot more people interested in things than others. Stories with words like ASYLUM SEEKERS or BENEFITS or JK ROWLING or HOUSE PRICES tend to get more hits than others. More hits = more readers = more advertising revenue.

 

5. So I'm not really incensed by some "quotes" that were made up by a copy editor somewhere. I don't like feeling like my emotions are being manipulated by some moron in Wapping or wherever they are based now.

 

Do you want to sit there feeling angry because someone is being paid to attract your attention by making you feel angry? Someone made up some stuff to give you the impression that a family on benefits was gloating, and then you fall for it hook, line, and sinker? Surely that should be making you angry?

 

6. I'm not ridiculing you, just making a point. It's a free country, and you can bloody well read or look at whatever you like, it just seems weird that someone as smart as you would take nonsense like that at face value.

[Agent Orange]

Yes, I do still feel like voting. To answer the OP's question. Why wouldn't I?! Instead, I could just sit on my hands, but I won't as I won't be able to type a whinging thread about the story in question.

 

Whatever happened to the word "proactive"? It seems these days people would rather channel their energies into whinging about how bad things are, instead of lobbying their MP. Do something useful, instead of whinging, get in touch with the people that matter cos I hate to tell you, but spouting off about on the forum is not going to change anything

[ricgem2002]

heres another reason why the benefit system needs to change http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Cheat-claimed-benefit-while-living.6228503.jp