Jonathan from No Sleep Til Brooklands tweeted:
And he was nearly right. The next day the Mail's 'outraged' article included 13 pictures. And two videos.
'Put your clothes on - it's a family show!' screamed the headline on the website of a publication that would no doubt call itself a 'family newspaper'.
And you can almost hear Chris Johnson salivating as you read his article:
Aguilera wore an very low-cut black dress as she cavorted with an army of lingerie-clad dancers while Rihanna thrust her way through her solo performance in pants and strapless bra.
And the Mail doesn't want anyone to miss out on any of these 'extremely provocative' routines, telling readers that they can 'scroll down to see video of the performances':
Jan Moir also complained about the 'sex-crazed nymphs before the watershed' so the Mail used three more pictures to illustrate her article.
It has been reported that there have been around 2,000 complaints about the programme and so the Mail had an excuse to write about it again. Not that they needed an excuse - on Monday night, the Mail's homepage contained eleven different 'stories' about The X Factor.
But they put the fury/outrage/storm article on the front page:
The continuation on pages six and seven contained several more pictures of the most provocative poses.
But it seems the paper was aware of the accusation of double-standards in pretending to be outraged while showing so many photos and videos.
So it went with the quite incredible headline:
"We apologise to readers but you have to see these pictures to understand the fury they've stirred"
Online, there was no 'scroll down for more leering' - instead, they went with entirely unconvincing:
Yes, that's the only reason they've been published. And if you believe that, you'll believe anything.
If the Mail website wasn't continually filling its pages with pictures of famous women in lingerie or bikinis, low cut tops or short skirts then the claim they are publishing these photos reluctantly might be vaguely credible.
But that their first article on this 'sleaze storm' included thirteen pictures and two videos proves they relish it and know it helps them have such a 'popular' website. To try to pretend they are aghast at such stuff is rank hypocrisy.
(While writing the above, the Guardian's Media Monkey published a similar, albeit less rambling, article on the same point)