I've just crossed over to the dark side for the first time in many weeks - I actually read an article at the Daily Mail website. Yes, I know, I know, but I simply couldn't resist reading the latest on the supposedly imminent US boycott of Scotland, which will doubtless lead to kilts being rechristened Freedom Skirts (or, better still, someone suggested Salvation Skirts). Talking of Lockerbie, does anyone give the slightest credence to this rumour doing the rounds about the British Embassy in Tripoli handing out Scottish flags to those welcoming Megrahi home? My first reaction was that it was paranoid drivel (which indeed it probably is), but then I did just begin to wonder where the average Libyan would locate several large Scottish flags (in pristine condition) at short notice.
But I digress. What I was going to reflect on was the character of the Mail itself, which is something that always startles me when I have a peek at the website. Given the well-known disdain the paper holds for, say, the coarseness of the BBC, or indeed for anything that offends the 'decent' values of Middle England, I would have rather naively expected the editorial staff to...how can I put this...actually reflect those stated values in their own choice of content. Instead, scrolling down the list of articles, I'm always left with the impression that I'm in fact reading a 2-for-the-price-of-1 combined edition of Heat and FHM specially designed for people who believe that the pictures are justifiable, but only when they're essential to the plot. (And of course who think asylum seekers spread disease, worry about being liable for inheritance tax even though they're not, and think Quentin Letts is actually funny.)
Exhibit A - "Danielle Bux narrowly escapes a wardrobe malfunction while showing off her holiday tan"
I would elaborate on the story, but I think the headline may already have spoiled it for you slightly. Danielle Bux's breasts almost slipped out of her dress...but didn't. Oh, and a photographer from the Mail just happened to be present at the dramatic moment (thankfully he wasn't wasted on trifling matters like the Afghanistan war). That pretty much covers it. Put these two facts together and what have you got? Material that is apparently more than sufficient for a lengthy story accompanied by three exclusive pictures of the, er, incident happening. Or...not happening.
And for the Heat-leaning female demographic, turn to page 27 for our shocking world exclusive photos that show Madonna now looks even more like Gollum than when we did the same stunt last year. Don't worry, we need to show you these pictures - how else are we to judge whether she's fit to be a mother?