Iains wrote: According to some sources the daily mail is the most widely read english language newspaper in the world. I have no way of verifying that, but if true, it makes banning it as a source even more dangerous.

I agree about the un-wisdom of a blanket ban, but why does the fact that a newspaper is widely read make a ban 'more dangerous'? Just curious.

Seems likely to me that there is a correlation between circulation and inaccuracy - which may make the Mail an unauthorative source, and therefore deprecated - though not banned.