The Daily Fail Strikes Again.

I have a genuine hate for The Daily Mail and its band of merry supporters for many reasons. An online article posted yesterday however cemented my belief that this paper needs its press rights revoked.

When the harrowing story of an 8 day old little boy dying after a single dog bite yesterday hit the news, most news outlets reported the story with at least a little compassion and though it baffles me as to why this story should even have been given press access considering the tragic circumstances and trauma I am sure it will cause the family. I am at least thankful that places like the BBC didn't take on this story in the way The Daily Mail did.

The Daily Mail or Daily Fail as it is less than affectionately referred to by its critics reported this story with not a hint of compassion and its follow up article today showed little remorse.

Using photos from the victims Twitter feed which were completely unrelated to the story, removed from the context in which they were originally posted and in my opinion an attempt to question the maturity of the child's parents. Because as we all know if there’s one thing the Daily Fail hates it would be young parents, (parents and children in any shape or form actually)

The Daily Fail continued on using tweets from the young mother, indicating that she was a part time model, unsure of her relationship with the baby’s father and even contributing details about the size of the house the family lived in. Completed with a comment from a neighbour, claiming the dog was always vicious and the input of experts who know that Jack Russell dogs will become jealous of new additions.

What baffles and angers me is why the paper think they have the right to invade the grieving families privacy this way? In such depth? Mere hours after the death of their beloved son. Surely this family are suffering enough without having their private lives pulled apart and splashed all over the internet by The Daily Mail.

Infact at the end of the article the Daily Mail added the families statement asking that they be left to grieve in peace. Ironic that the paper printed this after invading the girls Twitter and Face-book feeds and printing entirely irrelevant information about her life. I applaud the 3 reporters on such a poor peace of journalism, and I use that term loosely and ask them this; how they justify their actions?

The greedy desperation of this paper is disgraceful and shameful.

The PCC needs to take a serious look into the methods of this paper and its actions. This being just one of many stories the Daily Mail deems fit to print that the rest of the rational population find disgusting.

The Daily Mail also should consider removing the “comments” option from their website, whilst they state that certain comments are not allowed, it is in poor taste to allow its heartless readership place judgement on a situation they know nothing about.

The Daily Mail exploits and invades the private lives of so many of its subjects. Though by law it withholds printing its actual opinions they are always obvious in the way the articles are presented. It doesn't take a genius to get the gist of the Mails opinions.

I hope (but remain doubtful) that the Mail takes a step back and leaves this family alone to grieve in peace.

Make your own mind up here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236193/Jack-Russell-cross-bites-week-old-child-jealousy-attack.html