Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú BLOGS - Magazine Monitor
« Previous | Main | Next »

Paper Monitor

09:44 UK time, Wednesday, 2 May 2012

A service highlighting the riches of the daily press.

Thought a Twitter hate campaign might have stunned self-proclaimed beauty Samantha Brick - who achieved notoriety for a series of Daily Mail articles about how other - into silence? Think again.

This time she uses the furore over TV presenter Mary Beard, sparked by TV critic AA Gill after he branded her too ugly for the cameras, as an opportunity to .

Any suggestion the former TV executive may have some sympathy for the female struggle to be on-screen are quashed from the onset.

Anyone who seeks out an on-screen career is setting themselves up for a fall. They are laying themselves open to endless - and, in my opinion, entirely justified - appraisal of their looks.

Her verdict on Ms Beard's "wild hair, ungainly posture and make-up free face" is typically no holes barred.

While there is no denying that Ms Beard is a supremely intelligent and fiercely ambitious woman, there is absolutely no chance of her becoming a successful broadcaster in prime-time slots on flagship TV channels. The plain truth is that Ms Beard is too ugly for TV.

Brick's solution for women who find they have a "visual impediment to their career"? She says most of the presenters she has worked with have been "savvy enough" to "fix it".

These are university-educated individuals who have discreetly undergone nose jobs and eyelifts - recognising that to invest in their face is to invest in their future.

Never one to shy away from blowing her own trumpet, Brick goes on to say she was once urged by a TV boss to consider a career infront of the camera. What is perhaps slightly more surprisingly, is that she didn't think she was up to the job.

Even though I was as confident in my looks then as I am now, I declined, convinced that I would struggle to deal with the criticism of my figure and the constant assessment of my looks by beady-eyed TV executives
.

Given the criticism her articles have attracted, Paper Monitor can't help but wonder whether it was a wise move.

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iD

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú navigation

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú © 2014 The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.