dailymail.co.ukは安全ですか？

Gutter journalism... In fact, I read some news from here, for example about sport events, different scandals in this sphere, but sometimes news seems to be far-fetched. Less sense, more water, and almost every article is about that. I don't know who is writing all these articles, but guys in my opinion are paid in vain. Even I would make it better, lol. Still, I don't denigrate the whole service or all authors, sometimes there are catchy articles which are well-written.

Take information from this website with a heavy pinch of salt, cross-checking with other news sources and Fact Checkers. It sometimes presents Conspiracy Theories as facts, has supported some extreme right-wing viewpoints and is owned by the same non-UK domiciled person who runs Fox News. Wikipedia has removed it from the list of trusted news sources. In terms of adverts, along with many free-to-read online newspapers it is supported by advertising income. However the placement and frequency of the adverts is higher than many other news websites. I cannot comment on the number of trackers as I carefully set cookie permissions to only allow Necessary and Functional cookies, rejecting all other including those hidden on any separate "Legitimate Interest" tab.

The "Daily Male" may actually report on factual events, however it employs rumour and gossip to the point where quite a few articles are not factual but are severe editorial biased opinion pieces and "click-bait" instead of being factual reporting. Some articles promote hate, discrimination against different groups of people based upon race or religious belief and social division. This is not an honest or legitimate source of factual news information. This site prints news that US papers won't print because . . . standards. See: ***** There are also a lot of trackers and anti-advert blockers on this site.

MBFC: "Overall, we rate Daily Mail Right Biased and Questionable due to numerous failed fact checks and poor information sourcing." Questionable Reasoning: Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Some Fake News, Numerous Failed Fact Checks Bias Rating: RIGHT Factual Reporting: LOW Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY