Charles on… anything that comes along

Zara Phillips is fit. You can probably take that in both senses of the word, but principallly she’s an Olympic horsewoman, and you don’t get to be an Olympic pretty much anything without being exceedingly good at it — and strong, and, well, fit. Riding a lot tightens muscles you might not know you had, including around the stomach. A friend who’s been riding three times a week has lost a ton of weight, and was hardly lardy to begin with.

So what is the Daily Mail’s story of September 14? “Zara Phillips shows off her fuller figure as she prepares to defend European title“.

Usually impeccably dressed in a fitted riding costume, Zara looked out of sorts in a white vest and ill-fitting cargo-style shorts which hinted at a fuller figure than usual for the world champion sportswoman.

Uh-huh. A top rider doesn’t look like a catwalk model in between events? Perish the thought. Lordy, she’s fallen afoul of the Daily Mail Rule: she is female and she is not skinny-but-not-too-skinny. (Because if she was too thin, the Mail would be saying “Friends fear for too-thin Kate”. What do you mean, which friends? Any snapper is proud to call himself a “friend”. If he’s said “Alright Zara?” and she hasn’t actually spat in his face, he’s a “friend” for the purposes of stories like this.

(Though you have to be pasting the link - as I was - to see it, the images are labelled “BigZara”. Mm-hmm. I was going to pull in from the Mail site but thought there might be a row about copyright, which would be distracting.)

Let’s leave alone for a moment though how absurd this story is. What do the readers of the site think? There are tons of comments on this story. The Mail has a system whereby it shows you a couple of comments, and if you want to see the lot then you have to click on a little button.

So what comments are visible before you click the button? At the time of writing, they are:

She looks gorgeous and, most importantly, healthy. - Amberdallas, Waco, TX, USA

Looks like muscle and womanly curves from here.- Marcie, Tallahassee, Florida

Normal… and lovely! - Sue Timbers, Baldock, England

OK? Nice and calm. Now click on the full comments - 36, as I write.

The first three:

• I am so fed up of everyone complaining of how many thin women there are in papers and mag and then as soon as you get someone who has a NORMAL figure in one all the writers describe her as ‘fuller figured’ or having a ‘paunch’ or of putting on the pounds. Hounestly you either like people thin or normal, make up your minds! - Laura, London

• I find it hard to understand just how we women are supposed to look. Keira Knightley is very slim and there are countless articles criticising her for being “skeletal”. Zara, who is a champion horsewoman, is of average size (something I’d think ought to be recommended for a sportswoman) and is described as “fuller figured”, which is apparently a bad thing. Is there a certain weight bracket that we all ought to fit into? - Lorrie, Manchester

• The term “fuller figure” implies she is fat, which she most certainly is not! That’s muscle and she looks healthy and normal. Not at all like the “starving refugee look” so in style among the VIPs of the media world. Good for you Zara! - Morgan Le Fay, Alabama, USA

And it continues in that vein. The lesson one takes away: the Mail’s online readers - which it’s chasing with a determined drive - do not like these stories. They perceive the hypocrisy inherent in them and they’re calling the Mail’s bluff, extremely loudly.

The interesting questions that remain:

• will this feed back into the print edition and the decisions they make about the stories they run?
• who chooses the comments that get displayed (because there must be some decision about it - that’s no accident that the most emollient are the ones shown
• is there any chance that those first two people from the US really exist?

These posts might be related (the database thinks..):
• My assertion: Daily Mail uses fake commenters on (at least one of) its stories. My evidence: below (16 September 2007; score: 87.51%)
• Journalism or "churnalism"? Nick Davies of the Gdn weighs in.. (31 January 2008; score: 82.35%)
• To whom this email may not concern (14 July 2004; score: 75.68%)