The Media Blog

Down with this sort of thing...

The Telegraph and The Daily Mail have expressed shock today that the BBC marked the closure of Television Centre with a party for staff.

Readers of a gentle disposition might want to sit down for this next bit.

Apparently there was drinking. And dancing. Somebody may or may not have smoked indoors and there may even have been some sex - either in a studio or an office, The Telegraph isn't quite sure because it's pretty much cobbled together its entire report based on a couple of tweets and an article on the Daily Mail's website:

The Telegraph reports:

"The farewell gathering, held in three recording studios, was a raucous affair at which BBC employees drank and danced until the early hours."

The Heathens!

Helen Williamson, a producer, wrote: "At the BBC's 'goodbye TVC party'...did a nostalgic walk of the donut & heard someone s------- in one of the offices. Sackable offence?

Now, I REALLY hope the word The Telegraph has timidly censored there is "shagging".

If it is "shitting" I don't even want to know.

But if two consenting adults had sex at a staff party is this really news?

There's part of me that hopes that they were also dressed as Pudsey the bear and a Cyberman, doing it against the TARDIS. But it still wouldn't be news.

The Telegraph continues:

"Just days earlier, the BBC was accused of "over indulgence" after broadcasting extensive coverage of its lat [sic] days at Television Centre... Viewers branded the coverage "self congratulatory claptrap" and pointed out that it was not a story for anyone who did not work for the BBC."

Among the many things The Telegraph doesn't quite find room to mention in its article - such as the fact BBC staff had to buy tickets for their party which had a cash bar - is the fact that a great many viewers enjoyed the coverage. A survey of Media Blog readers found the majority supported the amount of coverage dedicated to Television Centre by the BBC.

Funnily enough, The Mail also overlooked the detail of the party being self-funded by BBC staff and the similarities between the two articles don't end there or with the use of exactly the same tweets...

The Mail: However, presenter Vernon Kay – married to Strictly Come Dancing host Tess Daly – was reportedly stopped by security as he left the building with a dressing room sign.

The Telegraph: Presenter Vernon Kay, who is married to Strictly Come Dancing host Tess Daly, was reportedly stopped by security as he left the building with a dressing room sign.

The Mail: In a second evening of celebrations on Friday, Madness performed live outside the building. Journalist Julia Raeside said: 'Drunk watching Madness. Might smoke indoors. It's that kind of night.'

The Telegraph: The following evening, last Friday, Madness performed live outside the building. Journalist Julia Raeside wrote on Twitter: "Drunk watching Madness. Might smoke indoors. It's that kind of night."

The Mail: Presenter Dave Berry added: 'Off to ghost town BBC television centre to work a stunning TV show project and also to pinch some stuff.' The day after the farewell party, photographer Ray Burmiston said: 'Feels like a ghostown [sic]...

The Telegraph: Presenter Dave Berry wrote online: "Off to ghost town BBC television centre to work a stunning TV show project and also to pinch some stuff." The day after the farewell party, photographer Ray Burmiston said: "Feels like a ghostown (sic)...

The Mail: Although most of the interior had been stripped of furniture and equipment...

The Telegraph: Although much of the building, in White City, west London, had been stripped of furniture and equipment...

Perhaps when it comes to giving the BBC a kicking the two newspapers are happy to share the workload.

See also:
BBC TV Centre remembered
Has the BBC been self Centred?

Having a Mair? A mixed week for Boris

London Mayor Boris Johnson has had a mixed week. On Sunday he was subjected to a pretty brutal interview by Eddie Mair on BBC1 in which it was put to him he is "a nasty piece of work", based on selected highlights from a BBC2 documentary the following evening.

But by the time the BBC2 show came around it became clear it was actually little more than a shameless puff piece for Johnson.

Some Mair on Mayor action on Sunday. (Credit: BBC)

Sure, it contained a review of past scandals: Johnson's lies and affairs. But these weren't presented in order to skewer Boris. It was done in order to get it all out in the open once and for all. This was Boris - on his terms - getting some tricky questions out of the way in order to clear a path to the Tory party leadership.

But just as Boris and his PR team must have been patting themselves on the back for a job well done, his old friend Darius Guppy, a convicted fraudster has leapt to Johnson's defence writing for The Spectator - the magazine Johnson once edited.

Guppy began by addressing Mair's criticism of Johnson for being sacked from an early journalism job at The Times for making up a quote:

"Eddie Mair has more front than Harrods. Consider this: a member of the British Media, Mr Mair, berates another former such member, Boris Johnson, for making up quotes! What planet are you living on, Mr Mair? Making things up is what people in your profession do for a living!"

File this next one under 'With friends like this...'

"Next, Mr Johnson, a politician, is criticised for lying to another politician... That's what politicians do ...And they fiddle their expenses and they pervert the course of justice and they commit perjury..."

"Tell me, Mr Mair, which do you think will cause Mr Johnson the greater difficulty on the Day of Judgement: making up some quotes as a journalist or the ritual humiliation of his wife and children?"

"But should being 'a nasty piece of work', as Mr Mair put it, preclude Mr Johnson from high office?"

It's a good question, but possibly one Boris would prefer his friends weren't asking.

Over-the-top movie comparison of the day...

The Daily Mail has covered a planning dispute in Grimsby. Hardly the most interesting of news stories you might think - and you'd be right - but the Mail has certainly tried its best to make the story a little more eye-catching: 

Before and after photos show the Apocalypse Now and then...

The story involves a couple's complaint that their old house was torn down by developers a fortnight after they had sold it along with some adjoining land which reportedly had planning permission for two houses. 

The demolition of their house was described as being like a scene from Apocalypse Now by an anonymous eye-witness who as luck would have it spoke in headline-friendly soundbites.

Powerless neighbours watched in shock as the machines tore the house down, in a scene they compared to the helicopter attack in cult film 'Apocalypse Now'.

If you haven't seen Apocalypse Now - the scene in question looks like this:

It's unclear exactly how many helicopter gunships were involved in the demolition of the house in Grimsby but presumably a fair few.

The couple whose house was razed to the ground by the massed firepower of the US army, explained that they didn't really want to sell, but the developers made them "an offer they could not refuse" - making it a bit like a scene from The Godfather as well.

"Mr and Mrs Watts said: 'It's horrifying. We are shell shocked. We just can't believe it has happened. It was a beautiful family home filled with memories."

It is indeed odd to think that the new owners decided against maintaining the house as a museum to the happy memories of Mr and Mrs Watts, but this tale of suburban Apocalypse gets even worse.

Because it turns out the developers didn't apply in advance for the proper planning permission to demolish the house ...making it all just like the scene in Star Wars where the Rebel Alliance demolish the Death Star without planning permission from North East Lincolnshire Council.

BBC TV Centre remembered

If you've not yet had your fill of nostalgia for BBC Television Centre, then you really must watch this wonderful video, created by television producer Ed Stradling, paying tribute to a rich history of classic television:

Over the weekend The Media Blog ran a survey which showed readers believed the BBC was right to treat the closure of the historic Television Centre as a news story, despite some public criticism of the coverage.

See also:
Mitch Benn: Proud Of The BBC
The BBC: Broken, embattled...but still the best we have

Has the BBC been self Centred?

The BBC has come in for some criticism online for its extensive coverage of the closure of Television Centre. Some suggested the BBC elevating its own "office move" to the main evening news was a bit self-important. However, the majority of Media Blog readers (of 1,309 surveyed) said the BBC was right to consider the closure of such a historic building a news story - although more than a third did say there had been too much coverage.

Here are the results of a quick poll run by The Media Blog showing a clear interest in - and affection for - BBC Television Centre:

1. Do you think it's right that the BBC has covered the closure of BBC Television Centre as a news story?

2. Do you think there has been too much coverage, not enough or a reasonable amount?

3. Television Centre: Is it 'a historic cultural icon' or 'just an office... get over yourselves'? 

Richard Littlejohn and a "culture of casual cruelty"

In December last year The Daily Mail was unequivocal in blaming two Australian radio DJs for the tragic suicide of nurse Jacintha Saldanha.

The Mail accused the pair outright of making "a fatal hoax phone call".

The Mail called Saldanha "A victim of today's culture of casual cruelty". The paper said Saldanha's suicide was a result of "casual, tacky, thoughtless cruelty that has infected popular culture like a plague".

Last December also saw Richard Littlejohn write an article for the Daily Mail attacking a transgender teacher called Lucy Meadows. 

"A casual, tacky, thoughtless cruelty that has infected popular culture like a plague."

Tragically it has transpired that Lucy Meadows has now been found dead. Early reports suggest she took her own life though this has not been confirmed.

If the circumstances were different, the Mail would no doubt be the first to link the media mauling Meadows received to her death. Yet on this occasion the Daily Mail's trademark willingness to point the finger seems to have deserted it.

Meadows had done nothing wrong yet she witnessed first hand a willingness to ruin lives for entertainment. Littlejohn attacked Meadows not because she deserved it, but because he could, having taken issue with the fact Meadows used to be a man, called Nathan Upton.

Littlejohn wrote:

"Nathan Upton is now in the early stages of gender reassignment treatment. He issued a statement which read: "This has been a long and difficult journey for me and it was certainly not an easy decision to make."

But despite acknowledging this "difficult journey" Littlejohn still thought it fair game to go on and put the boot in to an innocent member of the public.

Make no mistake, the Daily Mail will have known that Littlejohn's own distinctive brand of casual, tacky, thoughtless cruelty was going to make Meadows' "difficult journey" unimaginably more difficult.

Whatever the reasons behind Meadows' death - which remain unknown - there is no excuse for the abuse and the ridicule she was subjected to in the final months of her life. 

Standard jumps the gun on Budget

The first rule of budget club is you don't talk about budget club until the Chancellor has given his speech. Of course there have been a few leaks over the past few days, regarding what we might expect, but no confirmation as to the exact content of the Chancellor's speech.

Or at least that was the case right up until the Evening Standard jumped the gun and tweeted its front page which contained a raft of spoilers they will have been given under a strict embargo.

As London's evening paper, The Standard clearly cannot risk being left out of embargoed Westminster news, so there then followed a grovelling - some might say over the top - apology from editor Sarah Sands:

"An investigation is immediately underway into how this front page was made public and the individual who Tweeted the page has been suspended while this takes place. We have immediately reviewed our procedures. We are devastated that an embargo was breached and offer our heartfelt apologies."

"Devastated" no less.

The Standard's political editor Joe Murphy also waded in on the apologising and even the apologosing:

The BBC has a list of past budget leaks and the people who have lost their jobs over them, including Chancellor Hugh Dalton who was forced to resign in 1947 after details appeared in print before he had finished delivering his budget.

"It's political correctness gone ...er... ironic"

In its rush to criticise BBC censors, the Mail Online appears to have missed an obvious irony...

Those f*****g censors! 

Health advice you can't afford to miss...

Stop what you're doing, The Express has a story on its front page today that may just save your life:

These seven steps are surely worth listening to. Write them down and commit them to memory. Here we go:

1. Stay physically active

Now, I've actually heard rumours about this one before, so they might be onto something here....

2. Stick to a healthy weight

That one rings a bell too...

3. Eat a healthy diet

Oh OK, I think I saw that on a TV ad once...

4. Maintain good cholesterol levels

...now I definitely remember reading something about that on a tub of margarine...

5. Keep blood pressure down

I think there was an episode of medical drama House where they mentioned this.

6. Control blood sugar levels

Perhaps I'll give the deep-fried Mars bars a miss today.

7. Stop smoking

OK, I didn't know about that one [puts out Cuban cigar].

So there you go, we've all learned something today.

Regulation: Ignore the hype and remember the reasons

Monday's Sun enlisted Winston Churchill for its final push against press regulation. But if The Sun really wanted to invoke Churchill it should have paused to consider what the actions of the "few" have meant for the "many".

For all the finger-pointing, there is no doubt we are where we are today - discussing the introduction of press regulation via Royal Charter - because a few chose to abuse the freedom of the press that so many held dear.

The Daily Mail has reminded us that people died defending the right to freedom of expression. But that merely serves to highlight how shamefully that right has been abused by some since.

After all, people didn't lay down their lives so newspapers could get better candid shots of pre-teen girls, or so papers could accuse innocent people of murder or stalk grieving families and invade the private lives of people whose only crime is doing something the public might be interested in, rather than something which is in the public interest.

Something clearly had to change. The newspaper industry had proven itself incapable of self regulation.

One of the most compelling arguments for more effective press regulation came during the Leveson Inquiry from an unlikely source.

Hugh Whittow, editor of the Daily Express told the Inquiry that his paper had withdrawn from the PCC because the watchdog had failed to protect The Express from its own worst excesses.

Whittow said:

"I don't think [press regulator the PCC] was serving our best interests at the time because of the McCanns – that was a big story for us and I felt that they should have intervened. Everyone had too much leeway, there was nobody intervening at all as a result."

Whittow was effectively admitting that his newspaper simply could not master its unhealthy obsession with the McCanns. His admission was backed up by the words of Gerry McCann who said in February this year:

"The slurs went on for months despite our best efforts... And they continued for the simple reason that there was no-one and nothing with the power to stop them."

Whether you like it or not, that is why today we are discussing the institution of press regulation via Royal Charter. It is not because politicians longed to control the press, whatever the press may argue, but because the public was so appalled by what was revealed at the Leveson Inquiry that the government could no longer be seen not to act.

Now we have to wait and see how the newspapers will respond, beyond the obligatory scare stories about the death of free speech or articles comparing the UK to the Soviet Union, which would have us believe that effective press regulation may as well be a one way ticket to the gulag.

Such hyperbole - including the predictable mentions of George Orwell (see today's front page of The Sun, right) and comparisons to Zimbabwe and Iran - has merely cheapened the arguments against effective press regulation. Ultimately nobody put forward a credible argument which was as compelling as the arguments for trying to prevent a repeat of the way the McCanns and the likes of Christopher Jeffries were treated.

However, this doesn't mean anything is fixed or resolved.

We must now wait to see whether the new regulatory framework can actually be implemented and run effectively. We wait to see fully who is included and who opts to include themselves. A number of newspapers remain guarded about the likelihood of signing up - then what? These are all questions we need proper answers to.

In the meantime though we have to see past the obvious complaints from the press and remember why this became necessary. If this move helps restore some trust in the reputation of the press - and we should all hope it does - then they have more to gain than anybody.

Now it's front page news...

The Times has decided the arrest of Tina Weaver, former Sunday Mirror editor, as part of the ongoing Operation Weeting investigation into phone hacking is front page news today:

What a difference a year makes. Exactly 12 months ago, when Rebekah Brooks, former News Of The World and Sun editor and CEO of News International, was arrested The Times just didn't see such arrests as being worthy of the front page: 

Funny that.

So... was it the 'coldest winter in 100 years'?

With the sun shining at last and the recent snow falls beginning to thaw, it's time to pay a final visit to a headline from last November (right).

Was this past winter the coldest in 100 years? Did The Express prove the critics, the doubters, the bookmakers, the Met Office and everybody else wrong?

Of course not. A spokeswoman for the Met Office told the Media Blog:

"It hasn't been the coldest winter in 100 years. Far from it." 

She's not wrong. It wasn't even the coldest winter in 50 years.

Or 25 years.

Or 10 years.

Or 5 years.

BUT... it was colder than last winter.

For the record, this past winter, with a mean temperature of 3.3°C, was the 43rd coldest in the last 100 years which in the grand scheme of things is really pretty average - a description which could also be applied to the UK's weather in general, despite The Express's best efforts to convince us we're only ever just days away from being baked or frozen to death.

See also:
The Express's 'Frozen Planet' moment
The facts and figures behind Express weather claims
Weather forecasting: Express style

Telegraph criticises man for "doing his job"

The papers may be more accustomed to criticising members of the public for not working, but today The Telegraph seems intent on going after a man for doing the job he's paid to do:

The Telegraph reports:

"The Princess Royal's daughter was left unimpressed by the actions of overzealous security who appeared not to recognise her on the opening day of the [Cheltenham Festival]."

Of course, there is every chance the security guard did recognise her, but that wouldn't change the fact his job is to stop people walking across the Parade Ring as the horses are coming in.

"The 31 year-old... was prevented from crossing the parade ring after one race...and was seen in animated discussion with the guard, who refused to budge."

And the kids in Africa think they've got it tough.

Fortunately this non-story had a happy ending for all concerned:

"She was eventually let through..."

...presumably once the horses had passed.

However, that didn't stop The Telegraph contacting the security guard's employers:

"Organisers tonight backed the unnamed guard who was "doing his job" by keeping the safety of guests paramount."

By the way, it seems very unlikely the man is actually "unnamed". He is probably not a latter day version of Clint Eastwood's Man With No Name, wandering the Wolds of Gloucestershire looking for horseracing meetings to steward. Rather, it seems more likely The Telegraph wanted a name and the event's organisers quite rightly declined to provide it.

"A Cheltenham Festival spokesman said: "After each race we have a line of security guards in the middle of the parade ring, whose job it is to stop people walking from one side to the other in front of the horses... That is what happened in this case. We would support the actions of the stewards 100 per cent."

"He was doing his job and looking after the safety of the public, which at that point she is a member of."

Nobody likes over-officious security guards or stewards who make you walk the long way around because "rules is rules" but stopping people walking out in front of horses seems a reasonable rule to enforce, as these things go.

The Mirror's Cheltenham "shocker"

The front of today's Mirror carries news of a "Cheltenham SHOCKER" on the eve of this year's Cheltenham Festival. We're told of mounting "anger as shameless banker names his horse 'Fat Cat In The Hat'":

But how long has The Mirror been in shock about this?

This racehorse, 'Fatcatinthehat', already has 11 races to his name, including a couple of good wins. He's been racing since 2011 and was given his controversial name two years ago. Has The Mirror been in shock all that time?

It's not to say the name wasn't a pretty tacky decision at the time, but The Mirror's front page would be more accurate if it read "anger comes a couple of years after shameless banker named his horse Fatcatinthehat"... but then it doesn't really sound like front page news.

It's a girl...maybe... or maybe not...

The papers this week returned to feverishly speculating about the contents of Kate Middleton's womb.

'IT'S A GIRL!' declared The Mirror from the relative safety of a 50 per cent chance of being right. The Express, while no less confident of its facts, asked: 'IS IT A GIRL?' - no doubt aware that is one of two common outcomes.

Left to right: The Sun suggested Kate "blurted out" that she was expecting a daughter. The Express noted Kate would probably rather keep it secret but speculated anyway. The Times suggests Kate is playing a "game" by keeping the contents of her womb so secretive. The Mirror had absolutely no doubts.

The shaky basis for this non-story was the suggestion that somebody may have heard Kate accept a gift for her baby which she then may have referred to with a word that began with a 'd...' before stopping herself.

But that story now seems to have crumbled, allowing another round of stories this weekend about the fact the papers still don't know the sex of Kate's baby, other than to say it still might be a girl.

The Mail reports.

"Speculation that the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William are expecting a girl went into overdrive this week..." 

Nowhere more so than at the Daily Mail, it should be added:

"...but now new footage of the exchange when Kate was handed a teddy has come to light in which the mum-to-be does not start to say the d word."

The "d word"? Is "daughter" now banned? Do they think Henry VIII might be reading?

The Express, having done its bit to publicise rumours about Kate expecting a girl, also added: 

"This latest video footage should finally put the rumours to rest that Kate and her husband Prince William are definitely expecting a daughter."

Yeah, "finally", those bloody rumours!

Unfortunately for the Mail it means they now have to put on hold any stories they were planning about the unborn princess "piling on the ounces" in the third trimester before "squeezing her curves" into the birth canal come June.

A toilet press release...

A hopelessly optimistic press release doing the rounds of editorial inboxes today with all the likely success of a door-to-door punch in the face salesman, carries the cheery subject line:

Dangers for Elderly Revealed As Queen Spends Time on "Throne" With Tummy Bug

That's right. They have pounced upon the breaking news that the Queen had a tummy bug nearly a week ago. 

Clearly the delay owed something to checking the Queen was alright before trying to score some cheap coverage on the back of her runny tummy. But either way, surely the window of opportunity has been wafted a few times and firmly closed some days ago.  

The release even admits that it is behind the times:

"It emerged earlier this week that Her Majesty the Queen was admitted to London's King Edward VII's hospital on Sunday, as a precautionary measure, and was assessed for symptoms of gastroenteritis.

"Commonly, this condition of the stomach causes the unfortunate sufferer to spend a lot of time on the "throne"."

Throne. Because she's the Queen. See what they did there. 

We can only assume the people behind this release - who I can't quite bring myself to name - having laughed about it to themselves for the best part of a week thought their clever word play and belated opportunism would result in a barrage of publicity for their business.

And what line of business are they in?

Bathrooms.

Because if you're going to be spending a lot of time on the toilet you want to make sure your bathroom is a safe and pleasant place to hang out.

The release quotes a man calling himself a "bathroom expert": 

"Tummy bugs afflict us all but the older you are the more debilitating this illness is. Apparently women of the Queens [sic] age are more susceptible to falling down in the bathroom and in fact 1 in 5 women actually require hospital treatment for fractures, most commonly the hip."

It goes on...

"It's worth checking out the bathroom of any elderly person..."

Whatever floats your boat.

"We all want to live independently in our own homes for as long as possible but we have to be more aware of the dangers of falling in small spaces."

Having tried to scare old people into paying for a new bathroom with a veiled threat about being put into a home, the release goes on to promote a new online bathroom design tool.

"The Queen herself could use the online system and I'm sure she'd be delighted with the makeover she'd receive" he said.

Presumably once she'd got over the initial shock of a company exploiting her loose bowels for marketing purposes.

What next, Andrex asking whether The Queen scrunches or folds?

#ExpressBingo: Post game analysis

Back in January this blog launched a bingo card to test the degree to which the Daily Express relies upon an apparent rota of well-worn subjects for its front page each day - from its ubiquitous weather stories to tried and tested scare stories about foreigners. 

The bingo card was based on some fairly rudimentary science and it looked like this:

The rules were simple. The first time the Express ran one of these subjects on the front page a cross went in the relevant box. Stories could only count once.

Now, after 42 days and a three week wait for the final cross in a box, it is complete. For a while it looked like it might be over far more quickly after Diabetes and The Weather both appeared on day one. Pensions and the EU followed the next day and Foreigners and Kate Middleton weren't far behind (the below chart shows the number of days waited for each topic to appear for the first time):

During the 42 days it took to complete the card, only four days saw the Express overlook one of its dozen hot topics. On average there were 1.5 bingo card topics per day on the front page, boosted by five 'hattricks' (days on which the Express ran three bingo card stories on the front page).

Of course there was one story which outnumbered all of the others by far. The weather appeared on more than half (24) of the 42 front pages. Second place was claimed by a spate of scare stories about Romanians and Bulgarians (as the below chart shows, detailing the number of appearances by each topic):

Sometimes the day's news does coincide with this predetermined agenda - on stories such as the Queen's illness and the EU referendum. But when it doesn't The Express is not one to get distracted in pursuit of news stories that take it and its readers away from a very well defined path.

Even on the days when the bingo card drew a blank, the variation wasn't particularly dramatic - in a couple of instances the difference was a different member of the royal family or a different illness.

So say what you like about The Express but clearly it is confident that it understands the limited array of interests and fears that concern its readership and gives them what they want. It may even consider it a badge of honour that no other newspaper is so predictable.

Story of the week... Man buys biscuits

You might think that a man bringing biscuits into work for his colleagues has no place being considered news, but there are at least three good reasons to love this story from BBC Bedforshire:

1) Without stories like 'man buys biscuits for colleagues' the #NotNews hashtag on Twitter would be a duller place. 

2) The man's name is Alfred Hitchcock.

3) He looks like both Ant AND Dec.

The Spike tackles "Duchess ado about nothing"

Hollywood actor and Hacked Off campaigner Hugh Grant has called The Spike a "must watch", Tom Watson MP called it "what the papers say for the modern age" and comedian Rufus Hound called it "excellent".

But don't take their word for it.

This week the satirical media show tackled the misrepresentation of Hilary Mantel, a dodgy exclusive from The Sun's fake sheikh and a selection of stories which really didn't live up to their headlines.

For past episodes of The Spike, see:
Tabloids skewered on The Spike
The Spike: Love, lies and a car park obsession

Daily Mail strikes gold with 'lazy fat women' study

Few things get the Daily Mail's back up more than a woman who doesn't know her place, or a woman who's "let herself go".

So imagine the unbridled joy in the Daily Mail newsroom when a piece of research landed in their inbox which offered up the opportunity to say women have let themselves go because they don't know their place.

The article tells us:  

"Women are piling on the pounds because they have cut down on the amount they are cooking and cleaning, a study has shown. They are burning up to 360 calories less a day than their parents did because they are so sedentary around the house."

Never mind a host of other contributing factors such as diet, or the increasing instances of male obesity which go unexplained.

In case anybody was in any doubt about what a woman who doesn't do enough housework to keep herself thin looks like, the Daily Mail ran a carefully chosen photo:

That's right. Women have let themselves go because all they do is sit around smoking and drinking and probably watching Jeremy Kyle and Loose Women.

As one Daily Mail reader pointed out below the article:

"I cracked up laughing at this article, especially the pictures. Another day, another female-bashing article from the Daily Mail whose stance on women is transparent and predictable."

But despite protests, this is a story the Mail is very keen to promote.

In May 2012 we were told "Women put 6 inches on waists in 60 years: And the main reason? They don't use as much elbow grease when they do the housework".

In March 2011, the Mail reported: "Rationing and chores... How Fifties woman was so much healthier than us".

In November 2007, we heard: "Housework can help you burn 50,000 calories a year".

In April 2006 the Mail told us "Housework chores can shed pounds".

You get the idea.

These articles all follow one of the Mail's great guiding principles - the unshakeable belief that life was better in the 1950s, when society was a bit less "diverse", homosexuality was illegal and women knew their place.