Thursday, 10 June 2010

Mail hypocrisy over Big Brother

The Mail is trying to make it very clear it hates Big Brother:

Yes. Thank God:

After ten years, the Big Brother freak show is nearing its last hurrah. But first there's one last set of oddballs to put up with.

'Put up with'?

But what the Mail is actually doing is pretending it hates Big Brother while wallowing in every single moment and making sure its readers don't miss a thing.

So their homepage currently looks like this:

And they have an article spread across pages 20 and 21 of the newspaper, with the same 'thank God' headline, which provides pictures and short descriptions of each of the thirteen contestants.

Why give so much coverage to people it claims it can only just about tolerate?

Oh, and then there is:

In fact, the Mail website is so appalled by having to 'put up' with this programme that it has made a banner specifically for it:

This is, of course, typical of the Mail.

They like to claim that the sex in True Blood, or the jokes of Chris Moyles, or the sex in Belle de Jour, or a 'sickening' fight, or Kelly Brook's 'cavorting' with a porn star are all absolutely disgraceful, but then helpfully provides lots of pictures and/or detailed descriptions of them.

And for next 13 weeks, they will feign a superior attitude about Big Brother. They will sneer and look down their nose, but at the same time, they'll be gleefully reporting - and showing pictures of - everything. Beginning with one contestant:

stripping to a pair of lacy pink knickers late last night. The 23-year-old hair stylist...couldn't resist showing off her enviable figure.

Going by the rest of the Mail's leering, Heat-like website, it seems unlikely they find that difficult to 'put up with'.


  1. A very interesting aspect of the Mail- how do they pair hardcore voyeurism with prudish parochialism so effortlessly? Then again, I suppose their sanctimoniousness wouldn't be possible on the same level if there weren't the big glaring pictures there to disgust the Mail reader... probably two sides of the same idiotic coin.

  2. PippaG83 - It is interesting that the Mail website does seem a world away from the Mail newspaper - probably the biggest gulf between paper and website of any national daily. A lot of the celeb and paparazzi stories from the website never appear in the paper.

    But they know that all that mindless Heat-style stuff gets visitors...

  3. didn't the Mail website also decry the inclusion of a one-eyed amputee last night, or have they since realised that it is in fact one of our brave boys

  4. Anonymous - Yes, the headline in the print edition does include 'one-eyed amputee' instead of the 'minister who believes in UFOs' mentioned above. That was also the headline online last night but it was mysteriously (ahem) changed...

  5. I like how bisexuality is considered to be on par with being a Jordan wannabe and a Minister who believes in UFOs

  6. Not sure if you've noticed the caption to the picture about halfway down of Rachael and Davina McCall. It reads 'Colourful' - she's wearing all white and Davina's wearing all black, so are they perhaps referring to her skin colour? Bit strange.


Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment.

Comments are moderated - generally to filter out spam and comments wishing death on people - but other messages will be approved as quickly as possible.