We do not republish articles from Daily Mail. Our findings are below, each quoting the words it is about. Read the full article on the outlet's own site.
The Daily Mail calls Andy Burnham's EU talks a Brexit 'surrender' drive in its headline and opening line, using scare quotes that no one in the article is shown saying. Its headline states as fact that he is bracing for big concessions, when the body offers only unattributed 'concerns' about what the deal could include. Loaded words in the Mail's own voice and an unanswered claim from David Cameron push the reader the same way.
Headline goes beyond the article
Serious
“Burnham ramps up Brexit 'surrender' drive at summit”
Why this matters
The headline puts 'surrender' in quotation marks as if someone said it, but no person in the article uses the word.
The impression it gives
A named critic or official has described Burnham's EU talks as a surrender.
The context
The word is the Mail's own label and is never attributed to anyone. The same label runs through tabloid coverage of the same day as an outlet framing, not as a quotation from a named person.
“as he braces to make big concessions on money, borders and control”
Why this matters
The headline states as fact that Burnham is preparing to make big concessions.
The impression it gives
Burnham has accepted that he will give ground on money, borders and control.
The context
The body reports only that unnamed 'concerns are growing' that he might make concessions, and that these 'could include' certain items. The headline drops both the hedge and the fact that no one is named as holding the concern.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“concerns are growing that Mr Burnham will make deep concessions”
Elsewhere in the article“They could include contributions to Brussels coffers”
In its own voice the Mail opens the story by calling the talks a 'surrender' drive.
The impression it gives
The diplomatic talks are, as a matter of fact, a capitulation.
The context
The article itself reports Burnham describing the aim as setting up a dialogue on long-term ties. 'Surrender' is a verdict the facts in the piece do not carry.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“set up a serious dialogue”
“In another apparent sop to the EU”
Why this matters
The Mail calls a policy on electric vehicle targets a 'sop', and 'another' one, in its own voice.
The impression it gives
Each agreement is a giveaway to Brussels rather than a negotiated policy.
The context
The article reports agreements on food and drink, emissions trading and youth mobility without showing any of them to be a concession made only to please the EU.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“a series of agreements on food and drink, emissions trading”
“prompted a frenzy in Labour circles”
Why this matters
The Mail describes the party's reaction as a 'frenzy' with no source or example.
The impression it gives
Labour is in uncontrolled turmoil over the remarks.
The context
The article goes on to describe confusion over how any change would be put to voters and a Downing Street clarification, not a frenzy anyone is quoted describing.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“That forced Downing Street to clarify”
Gives a contested claim the last word
Minor
“I don't really think they've got anything to do with Brexit at all”
Why this matters
The Mail closes its Cameron passage on his claim that today's economic problems have nothing to do with Brexit, and sets nothing against it.
The impression it gives
Brexit has no bearing on the UK's current economic problems.
The context
The claim is contested: same-day coverage describes the UK as facing a long-term productivity and trade hit from Brexit. The article offers no economic evidence either way.