3 ms·
It doesn’t seem to show which publications these were in. Some of these headlines only show up in this article itself, when I Google for them. Without knowing
by zepto 6y ago
It doesn’t seem to show which publications these were in. Some of these headlines only show up in this article itself, when I Google for them.
Without knowing what the sources are and what the articles say, there is no way to make sense of this list.
- coldtea 6y agoPlus they could be false or true based on some technically or interpretation...
- radicalbyte 6y agoI would hazard a guess: Murdoch-owned papers. Because having the most powerful papers in England owned and ran by a foreigner from the opposite side of the planet is good for British Sovereignty.
- JetSpiegel 6y agoMurdoch is Australian, therefore a subject of the British Crown, no? Not a "foreigner" per-se.
- docflabby 6y agoProbably because they don't want to be sued for libel.
- oblio 6y agoWhy would they be sued for libel? https://wayback.archive-it.org/11980/20191004143251/https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/mail-on-sunday-fails-to-serve-readers-full-facts-on-eu-food-allergen-rules-that-could-save-lives/ https://wayback.archive-it.org/11980/20191004143251/https://... And sued by who? By Murdoch publications, the champions of lying from the top of their lungs in front of millions of people? :-)
- reddotX 6y agoBritish tabloids Daily Mail, The Sun, Daily Express, The Telegraph, FT etc. a cocktail of toxic trash
- Veen 6y agoThe Telegraph and the Financial Times are not tabloids.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y agoThe FT isn't. The Telegraph certainly is, although it pretends so very hard not to be.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bjohnson225 6y agoThe Telegraph online is full of clickbait and articles worthy of a tabloid. There’s nothing broadsheet about it beyond the fonts/styling used and its historic reputation. (In the interest of balance, The Guardian is shit too)
- juki 6y agoThe actual site (see the archive link by antientropic) has sources for them.