The DM regularly loses libel cases for publishing fake smears about various victims. But apparently it considers these losses a cost of doing business.
It has been called out for its racism on numerous occasions.
It's notorious for wildly exaggerated tabloid abuse of legitimate refugees and immigrants.
It called judges who forced proper constitutional proceedings during Brexit "enemies of the people" - sparking a record number of complaints to the Independent Press Standards Organisation.
Its comments section is a cesspit of race hate and petty ignorance.
It literally supported Hitler before war was declared.
There isn't a rational case to be made for not disapproving of it morally.
That, and I say this with sadness, doesn’t follow from your other points.
It just means they have different morals from you and I.
In context - and especially in light of yesterday's verdict - it's really rather unconvincing.
So did the Daily Mirror. And the Guardian was a big supporter of eugenics. All irrelevant to the current papers.
Interestingly, the writer of the article in The Mirror that supported Hitler was one Lord Harmsworth - great grandfather of the current owner of the Mail.
Harmsworth also used to own the Mirror before it was sold and changed its political orientation.
The Daily Lie, The Daily Hate-Mail, The Daily Heil
Of course these could all have been generated by the left wing liberal elites who have an issue with straight forward honest reporting. Best you have a bit of a google/search engine of choice to determine which is more likely to be true. You could of course try visiting their website and seeing for yourself.
I have no sympathy whatsoever, but as for the legal case I have no idea how this plays out.