Why the Daily Mail should be read - with critical scrutiny and moral vigilance

It all depends on the words you use. And the words you use betrays your attitude. And attitudes expose ethical convictions, our view of what's right or wrong. And of course there are always different perspectives, contested worldviews, and varied ways of thinking about the other human beings who inhabit our planet.

So yesterday the daily Mail once more showed it ethical (sic) convictions, betrayed its attitudes and used words intended to persuade us to think like its editor and writers. Not a chance.

The headline was UK DOLES OUT MORE AID THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY.

The problem is with the word "dole". Used in Daily Mail discourse it means handout, soft indulgent and spineless philanthropy ( a word that means love of human beings).

Now what difference would it make to the moral meaning and ethical purpose of the fact that Britain gives more to aid for development than any other country, if we said the same thing but changed the wording to reflect a different attitude and an alternative set of ethical convictions.

Suppose the headline had read UK IS MORE GENEROUS TO OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY.

That's more like it - and nearer the truth.

Comments

[Ronnie]

Agreed. Daily Mail readers have a very strange view of the world.