Daily Mail have surpassed themselves

[emyandpotato]

I came across this by accident when nosying at Keira Knightley's wedding photos and reading it has me raging. I feel that the reporter is disgusting and should be the one being judged not the family. They make sure to hit every 'chav' stereotype going: tracksuits, full screen tv, benefits detailed to the penny... They are being exploited!

What do you think? Are the family outrageous and deserve it? Or is this total exploitation and biased reportage?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-dropping-interview.html?ICO=most_read_module

 

[robinator]

I dunno, I didn't see it as judgey at all, to me all those details simply helped to paint the picture. But then I find things easier to read, enjoy and understand if they are descriptive.

Exploitative? Perhaps, but from what I understand that is to be expected from the daily mail, and these people were clearly willing to corroborate with the dm

 

[special_kala]

This was the headline article earlier and i can't believe it even passes as journalism.

There is no point to the article at all and actually the teen mum is doing pretty well for herself.

 

[robinator]

This was the headline article earlier and i can't believe it even passes as journalism.

.

Lol, maybe that's why I enjoyed it; it read more like fiction than an actual news article.

 

[smokey]

I cant see the point to the article tbh, it just seems like there was an interview just for the sake of having a interview, no real point behind it.
Was the journalist just there to write about their house and what they where wearing because thats all it seemed to me, might as well have been some sort of enclosure viewing at a zoo.

They girl got pregnant, so what? it happens, hardly news worthy and happens to families that are still together same as it doesnt happen to all families that have split up.

Couple of things I cant help wonder about though is A. what the hell was the teens father thinking dropping her round there for a few hours then not coming back to get her till a few days later, how did he expect her to take care of the babies needs ie nappies, clothes and food in that time, kinda comes across to me as a "here take her, shes your problem to deal with now"
B. why is there no mention of outcome for the father of the baby ie surely this is statatury rape seeing as she was under age.
C. how has the teen gained 3 years over the course of these two children, the first child has gained 3 years yet the teen boy has gone from being 14 to 19 over the course of this time, and if he is 19 now and she is still underage why is there no mention of the fact its still classed as statatury rape and he had sex with a underaged girl (multiple girls)
I know he may of and it just not been spoken off but surely that should be part of the report rather then treating the girl like freak in a circus.

The family agreed to the interview so I have no sympethy for them in that way but whats the point to the interview other then to encourage a point, stare and laugh type response.

 

[smokey]

Another point that confuses me but this is mainly because I have no idea how the role of legal guardian is supposed to work.
If the mother of the teen is not working and is the childrens legal guardian why are they in full time nursery thats being paid for rather then being at home with with their legal guardian that isnt working.
Does read a little to me as though the mother didnt play much role in the education of her daughter seen as she left the sex talk to her elder sister when the girl was 7, alot of understanding about the body and how it all works changes between 7 and 12

 

[Pearls18]

I love how they have totally twisted some parts of it, instead of positively discussing the girl going to college something she should be admired for, they have made it about her nursery fees being paid?! If it means she goes out and gets a good education to potentially work and pay back into the system (as well as it being good for her and her family of course) should we be annoyed? It's a good incentive! I found the article to be very judgemental, calling them Jeremy Kyle potential, it also makes out that 'broken families' are the cause of all teenage pregnancies, with divorce as high as 1 in 3 not every 'broken family' will have a pregnant teenager, but at least we don't leave them to starve and suffer if it does happen.

 

[Tasha]

I cant see the point to the article tbh, it just seems like there was an interview just for the sake of having a interview, no real point behind it.
Was the journalist just there to write about their house and what they where wearing because thats all it seemed to me, might as well have been some sort of enclosure viewing at a zoo.

They girl got pregnant, so what? it happens, hardly news worthy and happens to families that are still together same as it doesnt happen to all families that have split up.

Couple of things I cant help wonder about though is A. what the hell was the teens father thinking dropping her round there for a few hours then not coming back to get her till a few days later, how did he expect her to take care of the babies needs ie nappies, clothes and food in that time, kinda comes across to me as a "here take her, shes your problem to deal with now"
B. why is there no mention of outcome for the father of the baby ie surely this is statatury rape seeing as she was under age.
C. how has the teen gained 3 years over the course of these two children, the first child has gained 3 years yet the teen boy has gone from being 14 to 19 over the course of this time, and if he is 19 now and she is still underage why is there no mention of the fact its still classed as statatury rape and he had sex with a underaged girl (multiple girls)
I know he may of and it just not been spoken off but surely that should be part of the report rather then treating the girl like freak in a circus.

The family agreed to the interview so I have no sympethy for them in that way but whats the point to the interview other then to encourage a point, stare and laugh type response.

A and B I thought the same thing.

The age thing, she was 15 when she had him, she isnt now. If you look at the photo of the boys one is a child and one a toddler