Anton covered the story in full, where there was no baby, let alone one that was 'lost'. Essentially, Cole had wanted to start a family, but having separated from her husband, now won't.
Today, they're implying she's got a new boyfriend:
Jerry Lawton's article maintained the pretence for a while:
Smitten Cheryl Cole has poured out her heart about the new man in her life.
The Girls Aloud beauty stunned millions as she revealed her true feelings for hunky Black Eyed Peas rapper Will.i.am live on air.
She cooed about how the 34-year-old music producer was 'absolutely inspiring, fantastic, futuristic, creative'.
And she raved: 'I would work with Will for the rest of my life if I could. He is everything you would want from a producer, and also from a person. He’s a lovely person'.
So when the Star said 'new man' they actually meant someone Cole has known for over two years.
And when they said 'in her life' they meant he's worked on her album.
And when they said 'World Exclusive', they actually meant they've used what she said in an interview with Fearne Cotton on Radio 1 that was broadcast around 10 hours before they went to press.
They also claim Will.i.am has a crush on Cole, but that's not 'new' either, having been reported in the News of the World two weeks ago.
The Star was having a few problems understanding the word 'new' on Monday too:
And what was this 'new text sex shock' involving David Beckham?
David Beckham’s sex texts to Rebecca Loos were as X-rated as the ones Tiger Woods sent his porn star mistress, it was claimed last night.
Claimed, incidentally, by Piers Morgan, so it's obviously true and nothing to do with the slimy ex-editor not liking the footballer.
But 'new'? The alleged Beckham-Loos affair happened in 2004.
A couple of days before that, another shock, this one involving (surprise) Jordan:
See the headline template? '[Celeb] in new [eye-catching scandal] shock'.
The implication of this one is that newly-married Jordan has had an affair with her ex, Peter Andre. 'New affair shock'. The picture of them together. It all paints a picture.
The actual story?
Katie Price suffered humiliation in the High Court yesterday as she admitted wrongly accusing her ex-manager of bedding Peter Andre.
The glamour girl was ordered to pay celeb agent Claire Powell an undisclosed sum in slander damages, believed to be well into six figures.
Oh. Nothing like what was implied then?
The Mail also covered news of the payout, saying rather coyly:
the BBC had 'quite sensibly' edited the slanderous claim from the show, but the story still ran in several newspapers.
Who could they mean?
Indeed, that article is still accessible, despite the claim being, in the Mail's own word, 'slanderous'.
Surely it should be removed and surely the PCC should be demanding every newspaper that made the claim apologise, without the need for Powell to complain?
But back to the Star, and to David Beckham for one last dreadful front page, implying Mrs Beckham is pregnant:
Another 'World Exclusive' as the Star reports on the Beckham's 'secret joy' over 'World Cup baby'.
Except, as if you needed telling, there is no baby, again:
David Beckham will battle back from his injury hell helped by the baby girl he has always craved.
Crocked football ace David Beckham, ruled out of thus summer’s World Cup with a snapped Achilles tendon, has set a different secret goal.
And the quotes that follow are from an anonymous source.
So the Star's 'World Exclusive' appears to be: married couple have sex.
These stories and these misleading front pages really are the most unbelievable junk.
But they will continue to happen while the Star's circulation inexplicably continues to rise.