Stupid Dail Mail article

Discuss Stupid Dail Mail article in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

B

BruceB

-
Arms
Reaction score
142
Last edited by a moderator:
It sounds like Dunne has had solar thermal installed on his roof - "tubes", "plumber", "bath". Those are 'library' photos of a PV install.
 
Everyone replying to the article seem to think he had solar panels fitted not solar thermal. I would have though £5,000 was on the steep side for just 20 evacuated tube collectors.

Why the hell did he go ahead with a salesman in the first place? Why didn't he do his sums first as without subsidy solar thermal won't pay for itself unless the cost is a lot lower than £5,000 or hot water consumption is quite high.

He seems to think he would be saving on his electric bill as well, how exactly? If he is looking at his electric bills then of course he'll be dissapointed with his savings.

Why would you spend £5,000 on a product you don't actually know much about at all? You wouldn't spend £5,000 on a car without looking at reviews, taking it for a test drive, getting other prices from other garages/show rooms would you?
 
It sounds like his biggest gripe was with allowing himself to get buttered up by the salesman.
Maybe it's just "Tory propaganda".....
 
Stupid is as stupid does. A fool and his money are soon parted...they all spring to mind..

I personally had doubts about the effectiveness of PV systems in the early days, some research, simply maths and personal experience of them in buildings soon laid those fears to rest...there is also the other side of the coin..the more Homes and businesses that install these, the more robust our national grid becomes because there is less strain on the overall system and thus there is a reduced need for massive capital investment to keep things moving forward...

As far as I am concerned the law should be changed that all new build homes should be sited such that they can utilise a minimum of a 4kW PV system on the roof from day one.
 
tbf, he has obviously been fed a pack of lies and ought to be going to trading standards.

This story has nothing much to do with renewables at all, it's a straight story about door step trading / miss selling that could as easily have applied to double glazing, or any similar scam industry.
 
True, so why is this bloke writing for a national newspaper?

A quick glance at the comments section will confirm what we already knew - Daily Mail readers will believe ANYTHING. Renewable energy is a subject far too important to have these idiots writing about it.
 
SolarCity said:
A quick glance at the comments section will confirm what we already knew - Daily Mail readers will believe ANYTHING.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a sweeping generalisation - the comments I read seemed to be split down the middle: those who 'believed' renewable energy is a waste of money (I suspect they may have thought that already) and those who are very happy with their solar PV installation. Either way I don't think anyone was 'suckered in' by this article.

I would say your comment is 'typical of left wing Daily Mail haters' dismissing everything you don't like as "Tory propaganda" with throwaway comments such as "the rich get rich and the poor get poorer", "Cameron's Britain" and "Vote UKIP" but that would just be too ironic.
 
What a confusing and badly written article, although it is supposed to be humorous.

We all know the difference between PV and Thermal, but the public do not, so some people that read this will just think that "Solar" does not work, it will take 150 years to pay for itself.

Anybody who installs renewables know that it works, and most that have got it know that it works, unless they have had a badly designed PV/heatpump system installed.

It is strange don't you all think, that there has never been large articles printed in the national newspapers about how good renewables are, do you ever wonder why?
 
Adam W said:
That sounds like a sweeping generalisation - the comments I read seemed to be split down the middle: those who 'believed' renewable energy is a waste of money (I suspect they may have thought that already) and those who are very happy with their solar PV installation. Either way I don't think anyone was 'suckered in' by this article.
Click to expand...

To be totally honest, the content of most of the comments changed over the space of a few hours. Most of the early ones seemed to be praising this pratt and, as you point out, they are more than likely against renewable energy anyway. Now there seems to be a lot of people pointing out that the article is nonsense. Probably down to being linked in places like this.

Adam W said:
I would say your comment is 'typical of left wing Daily Mail haters' dismissing everything you don't like as "Tory propaganda" with throwaway comments such as "the rich get rich and the poor get poorer", "Cameron's Britain" and "Vote UKIP" but that would just be too ironic.
Click to expand...

Well, you can't really assume any of that really. I know plenty of people firmly on the right who understand how ridiculous The Daily Mail is. I don't think anyone is supposed to actually take it seriously anymore.
 
I doubt that, otherwise they wouldn't be reading it....(joke)

Seriously though, negative cliches and stereotypes do tend to be born from a facet of truth, or at least a pattern of repetition, right? This particular article sits smack bang in the middle of all that's wrong with poor journalism, the fact that its printed in the DM just gives more credence to the comments made above, generalisations or not.

In my opinion, writers and editors alike, who feed this kind of trash to their readers should be called out on the inaccuracy of the content - I couldn't find any direct way of approaching the author from within the DM website as I believe he's a guest writer. The more comment/tweets/emails the better as far as I'm concerned - accompanied by sweeping statements or not, makes no difference to the fact that the story stinks
 
It's not presented as 'fact' or even 'journalism' though - it's one guy's opinion. Some people will disagree with him, others agree, but very few will be "brainwashed" by the article or even "lap it up". Either way I don't think anyone could disagree that it makes for a good debate.
 
He's on linked in i think as a journalist if you fancy messaging him there. Although i think the new comments slating the article kind of make up for him not being forced to retract the article.
 
Adam W said:
It's not presented as 'fact' or even 'journalism' though - it's one guy's opinion. Some people will disagree with him, others agree, but very few will be "brainwashed" by the article or even "lap it up". Either way I don't think anyone could disagree that it makes for a good debate.
Click to expand...

Judging by the public's reaction to the MMR debacle, I would have to strongly disagree.

It's not really brainwashing, it's just a lazy public. If they read it in the newspaper, they tend to believe that it is true.

In this instance it is a failure on the editor's part. Articles like this cost people their livelihood and a certain amount of care should be taken when the decision to publish is taken.
 
You can tell from the comments that a lot of people haven't just read the guy's opinion and taken it as the truth, and it's the same with a lot of articles in the Daily Mail, in fact a lot of the comments on other articles slate the standard of journalism.
I wouldn't say Daily Mail readers blindly follow what they read in their paper any more than the readers of any other paper. If anything Daily Mail readers tend to question it more, it's just they seem to get stereotyped the most.
 
yeah, but how many of them are actually daily mail readers? I'd bet most simply followed links from other places there - it was passed around twitter by REA and a few others fr example.
 
Most of those comments were clearly written by Daily Mail reading happy solar customers and hadn't been imported in an attempt to sway the angle of the general consensus; compare the style of writing with the comments and the way the red and green arrows are dished out on stories where they find a rozzer asleep on the job and you'll see what I mean. It's quite clear which paper the police read.
I don't think it goes any deeper than that.
 
Recently, a Daily Mail story reported that left wing people were more likely to be intelligent than right wing people (yeah....in the Daily Mail). The comments were pretty clearly split between Daily Mail readers and non-Daily Mail readers.

That's the nature of the internet. It is far more easy to come across a Daily Mail story than it used to be. An innocent search for something relating to cancer, for example, could lead to a Daily Mail story hysterically claiming that wind turbines cause cancer or that cancer charity money is being spent on 'NHS tourists' or some nonsense like that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My thoughts here are it does not matter which paper an article is written in, or who is perceived to be the general type of reader for any said papers, articles that could be so misleading are damaging to the renewable industry.

Without reading it again, what points spring to mind, 150 years payback stuck in mine, and I am sure that many others who doubt renewables will be even more convinced they do not work.

Remember, all newspaper readers, no matter which paper, whether they are left or right, intelligent or not are all your potential customers, and every one lost is difficult to replace.

Do you not think it is about time that renewables got some good press, there are enough success stories out there.
 
The article was not researched - The guy writing it was completely confused. The editor should have picked up on this story and pulled it - it had a prominent position so a potential 4 million readers (that's not circulation but a guess at how many people will read the passed around newspaper. It's sadly an inditement of todays press! Probably due to a lot of cost cutting, all the old hacks have gone and young inexperienced journalists totally out of their depth with no one to turn to. Sir David English would have chewed the balls of this idiot! It is so factually incorrect that surely there's a case for damages.
 
Adam W said:
That sounds like a sweeping generalisation - the comments I read seemed to be split down the middle: those who 'believed' renewable energy is a waste of money (I suspect they may have thought that already) and those who are very happy with their solar PV installation. Either way I don't think anyone was 'suckered in' by this article.

I would say your comment is 'typical of left wing Daily Mail haters' dismissing everything you don't like as "Tory propaganda" with throwaway comments such as "the rich get rich and the poor get poorer", "Cameron's Britain" and "Vote UKIP" but that would just be too ironic.
Click to expand...

I've read enough in the mail about topics I know about to know that they are more interested in an hysterical attention grabbing headline than the truth. Pretty much every article about anything I have detailed knowledge of suggests a minimal amount of research and accuracy. I don't waste time on any of the papers these days, but the mail is the bottom of the dregs of an industry that repeatedly plumbs the depths of depravity, disinformation and dishonesty. People who believe what they read in rags like the mail are naïve fools. Does that make me a left winger, no, just someone who doesn't get suckered in by the nonsence of this rag.
 

Reply to Stupid Dail Mail article in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

H
Daily Mail Nonsense
The Daily Mail - The Beano is still in print! Don't fall for the solar panel flannel! COLIN DUNNE did- then realised the £5,000 carbuncle on his...
Replies
3
Views
1K
Harry_Worth
H

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

Tags

advice aus cable circuit course earth electric electrical electrician hello led light lighting lights looking new please question rcd socket supply switch testing training wiring
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top