A chastened Express?

with 3 comments

Reading today’s Daily Express is a very odd experience.

It still says ‘Daily Express’ at the top and has the incongruous tagline ‘The World’s Greatest Newspaper’. The paper is the same size, the same price, and has the same font. Yet there is something radically different about it.

There is, for one thing, no mention of Madeleine McCann, or her parents, or anyone else to do with the whole McCann saga. No real surprise there I suppose – Carter Ruck’s warnings and a bill for £550,000 finally appear to have got through to Richard Desmond and his editor, Peter Hill.

But neither is there any mention of Diana, or Shannon Matthews’ family, or Fiona McKeown. Heather Mills makes a brief appearance on page 13, but only as part of Ann Widdecombe’s column. Nor are there any ominous warnings of wild weather. The Islamophobia is even toned down – though the paper could not resist a short piece by Cyril Dixon on p.14 reporting that there will be ‘More attending Mosques than Mass by 2020′ (would this previously have been a p.1 splash?).

Does this signify the end of the Express’ endless recycling of the same 4-5 stories? Have Richard Desmond and Peter Hill become self-conscious about their cynical manipulation of the news agenda? Or is this just a brief moment of respite until the criticisms subside and the calls for an Express boycott die down?

Written by Martin Moore

March 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , , , ,

3 Responses to 'A chastened Express?'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'A chastened Express?'.

  1. Unless you were reading a stolen copy (or an online version), I’m not sure I can condone your continued purchase of the paper.

    Matthew

    26 Mar 08 at 7:28 pm

  2. Yes you may be right Michael,a number of good solid lead stories since the McCann apology but there is a Maddy story today.I think that the jury is out still out though

    Nigel Barlow

    27 Mar 08 at 10:15 am

  3. Matthew – I confess. I pulled out 40p. But what alternative do I have? How can I criticize the miserable paper if I don’t read it?Nigel – ahh, only a very brief respite thenmartin

    Martin Moore

    27 Mar 08 at 11:34 pm

Leave a Reply