Just to prove you can't believe anything in the Daily Mail, they have an article on why you should visit Utrecht, then post photos of Lisbon and Trier .

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/ar...VERYWHERE.html

Of course by the time you read this they may have read the comments and corrected the pictures...

That's really funny. The still have the wrong photos.

However, Utrecht is a lovely town and so is Trier. Lisbon is also beautiful but does not quite fit into the row of pictures of northern European towns.

Still showing the wrong photos...

You can just tell immediately that those pictures are wrong there.

It's the daily mail, its target readers will have never been to any of the three places and would be terrified to go to them.

Very nice mess they made of that. Love the comments in Dutch confusing the English readers.
I saw a recent article on Galicia in the Irish times. They too had added photos of places which were not in Galicia. I tweeted them about it and all they did was keep the few that were ok the rest were removed.
https://twitter.com/ribeirasacra/sta...40838415998976
So I have just tweeted the DM on this.

What would Strabismus (whom God preserve) have said?

they seem to have fixed [most of it] now - I'm not familiar enough with any of the places to know if they are all Utrecht but the top two look as if they probably are.

very funny.

but strange - I know that the Cornwall tourist board has a library of local photos that journos etc can access - so all they had to do was to ask the Utrecht TI.

simples.

I just looked and the wrong photos still seem to be there.
Utrecht is my nearest big city, half an hour away by train.

I seem to recall reading the daily mail for the pics of the ladies...
Didn't bother me if they came from a 'wrong' town

I like Utrecht too. And they understand my Flemmish there... unlike in Amsterdam.

I seem to recall reading the daily mail for the pics of the ladies..>>

that would be the Sun, pariswat. Too many little old ladies like my mum read the Daily Mail for them to use girlie pics.

The Daily Fail.

You should post this over in the Lounge, where the clueless Yanks like to quote tabloid rags like The Mail.

Thin

They got the message: all pics are familiar now.

Does anybody actually read that rag?

Don't they call it "Urech" at one point?

Looks like they need more fact checkers - and spell check.

>>that would be the Sun, pariswat. Too many little old ladies like my mum read the Daily Mail for them to use girlie pics.<<

By repute, annhig, I believe the Mail Online has a rather more racy approach than the print version, though with its own unique combination of prurient censoriousness rather than the Sun's overt nippleage.

P you'll find even the SUN has managed to do without the official nipple on page 3 for some time now, still manage to offer a lass in her underwear now.

Also they never said sorry for their Sheffield/Liverpool coverage so not read there.

" they never said sorry for their Sheffield/Liverpool coverage so not read there."

Neither did the BBC for carrying EXACTLY the same untrue allegations against Liverpool supporters the night before. And broadcasting them to four times as many people as read The Sun.

But it's not owned by Murdoch, so Britain's bigots - and Liverpool's infinite number of self-pitying whingers - haven't run a "let's boycott the BBC" campaign.