As you are no doubt already aware I harbour strong feelings of disgust that the Daily Mail is read by around 2 million people. I find it hard to comprehend how that many people want to be fed a diet of hate, lies and just plain piss-poor information. Some would argue that there are worse tabloids out there - The Sun, The Daily Express etc - but today the Daily Mail has sunk beneath them all with its disgraceful reporting of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) report on social housing. I first saw this report on BBC Breakfast and heard more about it on Radio 5 Live on my way to work. The overwhelming emphasis of the report is that the impression that a lot of people have that somehow immigrants jump to the top of the social housing queue because of special treatment is entirely false. It is a myth. I immediately thought, how are the Daily Mail going to spin this one? On the BBC website they go with the headline:  The opening paragraph and general coverage of the story:
There is no evidence that new arrivals in the UK are able to jump council housing queues, an Equality and Human Rights Commission report says.
Once they settle and are entitled to help, it adds, the same proportion live in social housing as UK-born residents...
"It is largely a problem of perception," he [Housing minister John Healey] told Today.
"The report shows there is a belief, a wrong belief, that there is a bias in the system."
Reuters go with: 'No evidence migrants jumping housing queue'. Opening with:
Migrants to Britain are not receiving preferential treatment over the allocation of social housing as many people believe, a report released on Tuesday said. Last month, Prime Minister Gordon Brown promised to overhaul the system to "give more priority to local people," addressing public fears that migrants were getting unfair treatment. But the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said research showed such concern was misplaced.
Build.co.uk go with: Migrants 'Not Getting Housing Priority'. Opening with:
The vast majority of people who live in social housing in Britain were born in the UK according to a research study published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission today.
ITN: Immigrant housing priority 'a myth'; Guardian: Claims that immigrants prioritised for social housing 'a myth'; The Independent: Study 'ends myth' of housing for immigrants; The Daily Telegraph: Immigrants do not get housing priority, study shows. Even the Daily Express headline is refreshingly accurate (even if they still shout it): IMMIGRANTS 'DON'T TOP HOUSING LIST'.
So, how does the Daily Mail tackle this story? Well, this is their headline:
Yes, that is right, they use the report to beat immigrants and still insist that they are taking too large a share of social housing. They open with:
Nearly 400,000 homes have gone to tenants who were born abroad, the Government's equality watchdog has said.
One in ten state-subsidised homes is occupied by an immigrant family, according to the first estimate of the impact of immigration on social housing.
More than half of the immigrants who live in council or housing association houses and flats are in London, the report from the Equality and Human Rights Commission found.
It added that four out of ten people born abroad who live in the capital are living in subsidised housing - a figure that suggests a million people in immigrant families have found homes in social housing in London.
And also feel the need to quote Civitas (think BNP in smarter suits):
But Robert Whelan, housing expert at the Civitas think tank, said: 'In some areas most units of social housing are going to immigrants, which provides fertile soil for the BNP.
'This report does not reflect the concerns of working class people and it is extremely unhelpful at a time when the BNP is hoovering up votes.
'It does not recognise the claims of longstanding local residents whose families have contributed to communities for generations.'
I do not think any analysis is neccesary here, with this unbelievably skewed article The Daily Mail make it clear that they want to protect the myths that feed their own racist agenda. What do you expect from a newspaper that recently said: 'The "British homes for British workers" plan, if it succeeds, will force councils to end the unfairness which sees immigrants with large families vault to the top of the council house list'. This has now been proven to be a myth, but you will not read that on the Daily Mail website, you'll just read more lies piled up on the rest.
|
"Each year about 550,000 foreign nationals arrive in Britain to stay and work for a year or more. Many are on short term work contract. Those who plan to stay longer or are asylum seekers are usually the worse off and tend to settle in areas where there is already an impoverished settled community. On the IPPR figures that is about 55,000 foreign national who are competing with local people for scarce housing. The fact that five years later they are entitled to this housing because they are able to apply for residency does not lessen the resentment of local people, however cleverly the statistics are used. The issue is not that newcomers get favourable treatment and jump the queue.
Whether reasonably or not, many local people resent that they are in the queue at all and, consequently, are in competition directly with other poor people. The Government says the real problem is a shortage of housing; it could equally be argued that there are just too many people."
One could make a business out of digging up the flowers in the park overnight and selling them at the market the next morning. This would be wrong. Just because it is a business does not excuse it from social responsibility - it is damaging society for the rest of us.
I know you were just reporting the message wizardweb, this isn't a critisism of you.
Best regards,
Jonathan
Immigrants - go home!
Gays - burn them!
Socialists - ZanuLiebor propaganda!
etc..
We enjoy regular bouts of immigrant bashing, gay hating, cyclist threatening vitriol under the banner of popular reporting, but sadly Bristol lacks a rival paper, so thats that then.
even the online pages attracts the violent, exterme and antagonistic nutters that frankly you'd be scared to meet on the street, something that the paper encourages even more
yet here we are, the mail and papers like it thrive.
how?
They figure if they start from that stand-point they'll get enough knee-jerks out of the public to make money. Polarise the people and you'll get more sales. He said it's nothing to do with fact, truth, evidence or fairness and everything to do with gathering the readies.
I commented that was irresponsible and was reminded they are a business not an encyclopedia. To me it doesn't change the fact they're all a-holes...
I hope that at least some of the Mail's readers will look at that online and post comments to the effect that hang on, doesn't the report mean that nine out of ten houses don't go to immigrants, but maybe that's expecting too much.