Apparently, someone who is now 41 doesn't look as young or 'fresh-faced' as they did when they were 20:
So the Mail have got their hands on a pap shot of Erika Eleniak eating lunch and think it's worth pointing out she doesn't look quite like she did when made-up for a TV show over twenty years ago.
But Daily Mail Reporter hasn't even got the simple facts right in this non-story. There are two mistakes in the first two sentences.
If Eleniak was first in Baywatch in 1989, that's longer than 'just over ten years' ago.
Moreover, she wasn't in the show until 2002 as they claim - she left in 1992. Since Daily Mail Reporter used IMDB to find out some other details of her career, they should have noticed that as well.
God, Erika Eleniak - reponsible for more Saturday afternoon wrist action than the invention of the frisbee. Love that woman, far better than Plastic Anderson.
ReplyDeleteEpic maths fail!
ReplyDeleteLater in the article it says "Her carer has been fairly quiet" instead of "Her career..."
ReplyDeleteThis sums up everything that's wrong with the Daily Mail - a pointless article full of obvious mistakes. Does anyone even check these articles before publishing them?
Tell you what, I was 38 yesterday and 1989 does feel like just over 10 years ago! Where has the time gone?!
ReplyDeleteReminds me of the pointless article the Daily [Hate] Mail published a few years ago ridiculing Mick Taylor (who was in the Rolling Stones but left) for not being as rich as the other guys who stayed in the band. The man is happy with his life. What else matters? Plus I know for a fact they misquoted and lied to those who 'talked about him' in the 'article'. The Daily Mail are a bunch of assholes.
ReplyDelete@Nfreak
ReplyDeleteWhy would they bother checking thier online articles?
They don't care about facts or acuracy, those things cost time and money. Time that thier churnalist could be out harassing more celebs or making up more stories about immigrants and money that could just go to thier fat cats.
They just churn them out as fast as possible, creating more pages on thier webshite to show more adverts on and gain more money. They attract some lowlifes to make crude comments and the article then sinks lower and lower down the popular list before eventually vanishing, having done it's nasty work for the day.
Brilliantly, the Mail also explains that she still has the great bone structure she had in her youth. Who would have guessed?
ReplyDeleteI'd imagine that rather than there being two factual errors in this report, the problem revolves around one simple typo. If the article had said Eleniak had been in the show for three seasons from 1999 to 2002, that would seem more logical (as the series in question would be consecutive) and it would be more justified to say this was 'just over' 10 years ago. Whether or not this is factually accurate I have no idea, since I have never watched an episode of Baywatch in my life (nor do I ever wish to do so!). Whatever the issue, it does not remove from the fact that the story is vapid, ageist and sexist drivel.
ReplyDelete