Wednesday, 19 May 2010

The spite - and lies - of the Daily Mail

It appears that my earlier blogpost misjudged and underestimated the Daily Mail.

I had rashly suggested that the Mail's dismal 'Girl who married Anne Diamond's husband leaves him...for a woman' was a very odd, and completely unimportant, 'story' for the front of the paper.

It didn't appear to deserve to be in a newspaper at all, let alone on the first and seventh pages.

But maybe there was, in fact, a reason for the Mail to give this 'story' - an invasion of the privacy of two far-from-public figures - such prominence.

What reason?

The man in question, Mike Hollingsworth, won £50,000 in libel damages from the Mail in May 2007 after it had printed claims that he had hit a former lover during a row.

So, far from being pointless, this appears to have been the Mail settling a score, splashing Hollingsworth's alleged marital problems on the front page as revenge for his audacity in challenging them for printing a lie four years ago.

It wasn't just a worthless piece of garbage, it was a worthless, vindictive piece of garbage.

The pettiness and spite of that - and of waiting so many years to do it - reveals much about the sheer bloody nastiness of Paul Dacre and the Daily Mail.

Still, whether newsworthy or not, at least if the Mail put it on the front of their paper, they were sure the story was absolutely correct.

Weren't they?


It was reported today that Kimberley Stewart-Mole is now in a lesbian relationship, having left her husband Mike Hollingsworth. We have been informed and accept Ms Stewart-Mole is not a lesbian or in a relationship with a woman and apologise for suggesting otherwise.

Truly, words fail.

(Hat-tip to this anonymous comment person and Kate Muggins) The above was edited slightly to add the apology which the Mail published as this post was being written.


  1. The link to the "Anne Diamond's ex" story now goes to a no longer available page...

  2. Just spotted this blog. Well done - well worth doing. The media in this country have immense power and often use it atrociously.

  3. just checked the mail on line does`nt seem to bee there

  4. D-Notice and Anonymous - No, now they've apologised for it, it's been removed. But hovering over the link just helps prove it was there once. Because it takes some believing.

  5. Oh!. Ann Diamond!. I knew I'd heard the name before. It was another one of those idiots that thing games are to fault for everything that goes wrong in the UK:

    She must think them so awful that she didn't even want to get them in her hand, seeing the original photo published by the Mail (which I saw in its day). See here:

    They had to photoshop the games in.. rather professionally, I might say.

  6. just found this great blog from a link from another one. most journalists seem to be sociopathic,they don't feel any guilt because they have no conscience. keep up the good work(i couldn't do it as i'd probably have high blood pressure having to read through the tabloid crap)

  7. Anonymous (21.42) & (00.12) - Thanks, really appreciate it.

  8. Unbelievable! Deleting the original article and pretending it never existed (common practice for the tabloids) seems incredibly sinister to me. Any decent publication with a sense of responsibility and accountability wouldn't do that.

    Anyway, like the commenter before me said, keep up the excellent work! I certainly couldn't wade through the shitheap of lies and childish spite every day either.


  9. Wow, I actually just groaned out-loud as this. I thought the first half of your post was shocking enough, but then to find out it was all bullshit anyway....

    Notice how quickly the DM have retracted this though? As you've noted before, it usually takes weeks to clarify this sort of shit. I reckon they're worried of another lawsuit - surely the law is on Hollingsworth's side for a second smear?

    'Words fail' indeed. Keep up the good work.

  10. I particularly enjoy the homophobic undertones of the apology.

  11. The "apology" surely begs the question, if Ms Stewart-Mole is not, in fact, a lesbian or in a relationship with a woman, why on earth did the DM say she was? Presumably it's OK just to make up anything about anybody until someone tells you otherwise, when you can get yourself off the hook by printing a half-hearted apology.

    That's not even to get started on the underlying homophobia of the whole thing.

  12. Sheri - that's a question I hope we find out the answer to at some point.

    And the apology is also half-hearted in the sense that they have yet to publish it in the paper. Why should they - not like they stuck the original on the front page. Oh...


Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment.

Comments are moderated - generally to filter out spam and comments wishing death on people - but other messages will be approved as quickly as possible.