[pobop]

They've got an exclusive interview about Kym Marsh, who lost a baby earlier this year.

Though they've got a picture of her with a baby called Daisy Perkin who they're calling her daughter.
She doesn't have another daughter, I find this a bit hurtful.

"Hope: Kym Marsh with daughter Daisy Parkin, who was born at 24 weeks. Her twin, Archie, lived for only one week"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...-21-weeks.html
(first picture down)

-Insensitive thing to do to somebody who's lost a child.
-Totally mediocre reporting by the DM... this is supposed to be an exclusive.

[humphryb]

Probably human error.

Anyway did you read the article??
It say's quote:

"I met Gemma Parkin who gave birth to twins Archie and Daisy at just 24 weeks and three days. Archie survived for only one week, but Daisy was allowed home after three months."

[methodyguy]

I would not be one bit supprised at what The Daily Fail would have spread about their gutter pages especially after the homophobic Jan Moir wrote her disgusting article about the late Stephen Gately.

[Radiomaniac]

It's an caption error - something very, very common to The Mail.

The article was written by Kym Marsh, so she would have been aware of what it contained.

[pobop]

Originally Posted by Radiomaniac

It's an caption error - something very, very common to The Mail.

The article was written by Kym Marsh, so she would have been aware of what it contained.

No, a picture editor would have done that.

[Sloopy]

It's a quote taken directly from the article - the twins Kym is discussing are named Daisy and Archie; it just happens to be an unfortunate coincidence that Archie also the name of the son she lost.

[phil solo]

Just standard Mail incompetence really, nothing new here.

[Sloopy]

I'm surprised they haven't edited it by now. Often happens when an error is made or an article is met with a negative response.

[Radiomaniac]

Originally Posted by pobop

No, a picture editor would have done that.

I didn't mean she would have been aware of the caption error. It was an error, no-one noticed it, which is why it escaped.

I meant she would have been aware of what was in the article, as she wrote it herself, which you said was totally mediocre reporting by the Mail, and an insensitive thing to do to somebody who's lost a child.

[humphryb]

I think some people are just anti Daily Mail, you could have an honest decent article in there, but some would still whine about it.
For those that do moan about the Mail, why read it or even take a look?

[Sloopy]

In the wider scheme of things it's just a sloppy error - but not meaning to be intentionally hurtful.

I very much doubt a mistype in a tabloid newspaper compares to actually losing a child.

[captainkremmen]

They've changed it now

[NikkiClo]

Originally Posted by methodyguy

I would not be one bit supprised at what The Daily Fail would have spread about their gutter pages especially after the homophobic Jan Moir wrote her disgusting article about the late Stephen Gately.

People are still upset about this and going on about it?!!

[Sloopy]

Originally Posted by NikkiClo

People are still upset about this and going on about it?!!

It's just one of many bandwagons, particularly when it comes to the DM.

Whilst I wouldn't disagree many of their articles are provocative and often inaccurate, some folk jump on the bandwagon of complaint without even knowing what they're actually complaining about.

[phil solo]

Originally Posted by Sloopy

It's just one of many bandwagons, particularly when it comes to the DM.

Whilst I wouldn't disagree many of their articles are provocative and often inaccurate, some folk jump on the bandwagon of complaint without even knowing what they're actually complaining about.

The Daily Mail itself tends to promote such activity with its bigotry, hatred and sh*t-stirring. It's nice to see them getting their own ar*es kicked by it for once.