Is there really nothing more important going on in the world?
And every front page headline is a piece of total fiction. So Jordan's 'girl on girl jungle lust' didn't exist. Her 'fumble in the jungle' didn't happen either and was her having a shower.
The next day they revealed:
The Star said she had:
let slip she is doing I’m A Celebrity to impress her ex-husband.
She told OK! magazine: 'Hopefully he’ll watch the show and realise what a decent person I am.'
So she 'let slip' to magazine with weekly sales of around half a million? A magazine that happens to be owned by Star owner Richard Desmond. Surely this isn't just some lame cross-promotional fluff is it?
Oh, it is.
But even in the excerpts the Star publishes, she says neither she wants Pete back, or that she wants to re-marry him. Indeed, she quite clearly says the opposite:
She said: 'I’m 100% not looking for love. The producers told me they’re putting a fittie in there, but I’m quite happy with the relationship that I’m in.'
The next day there was no pic, but her name still appeared in the headline:
Star front pages about 'fixed' reality shows emerge at least once per series (for Big Brother, X Factor, or whichever series is on at that time). But did I'm A Celebrity contestant Camilla Dallerup really reveal the, ahem, 'TV show's dark secret' as the sub-head suggests? Is there a direct quote where she says 'fix'? Take a guess...
On Friday, the front page was this:
The side-bar shows the Star is already running stories on Celebrity Big Brother, so that will be the paper's next obsession. The main headline is another lie though, and also, given the lack of punctuation, nonsense. But did she says she would quit? Not quite:
I’m absolutely ready to leave. I’ve had enough.
'Ready to leave' is not exactly the same as 'I'll quit' though, is it?
And then today:
At least the punctuation is correct. And there's a weird bit of innuendo too. But did she definitely say she was going to die on the reality show? Not quite:
She cried: 'I am petrified I’ll die. Please don’t let me fall. I feel like I’m being executed every day.'
Lots of people are petrified of dying. That doesn't mean it should be on the front page of what is supposed to be a newspaper.
Perhaps a dossier on all this should be sent to the Press Complaints Commission (for all that's worth). This is front page lie after front page lie. It's not accidental, it's a deliberate ploy to sell more papers and to hell with the truth.
Clause 1 of the Code of Practice says:
The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information
So how does all this muck not violate that?
And it's not just the Star who are obsessed with Jordan either. The Mail, which regards itself as the absolute model of middle-class reserve and good taste, now has a website which doesn't give a toss about any of that. It's become dedicated to celebrity flesh, reaching the nadir in the two upskirt pictures it has run this week. On top of that, it has now decided to publish as many pictures of Jordan's tits as it possibly can.
On Wednesday, Jan Moir wrote an attack on Jordan calling her - apparently without irony:
as charming as leprosy.
She accused her of 'whining' and 'self justification'. Also without irony. Moir also referred to her as:
rapacious, publicity-mad, boobilicious madam... KP Nutty... humourless, balloon-breasted, great, roaring She-Chav... ghastly... she looks like a toothy Donald Duck in an Alice Cooper wig. Five minutes after stepping out of a sheep dip of fake tan...
And the article comes with five pictures of Jordan just so you can see how 'balloon-breasted' she is.
The same day, another article included no fewer than 13 pictures of her and there were 13 more in following day's update, including this one, for which there is simply no excuse:
That can now be added to the many charges against Mail Online Editor Martin Clarke and his claim that 'news is far more important to us than showbiz'.
No, Martin, half-naked women are far more important to you than anything.