Oh I agree with you, she's more a chick lit writer, not anything with gravitas. But when even heavy hitters like Hitchens admit they're at the mercy of their editors, it's easy to see how it happens that writers (especially in the DM) write things that are obviously going to get them in trouble. Like Liz Jones, she's a smart woman but she regularly writes stories that get the DM readers blood boiling! She must know what she's doing, it probably keeps her in her job.
Yes and no. When writing something, you are well aware it is going to get subbed (and if you work on Google Docs you can watch the editor working on your text in real time:D) So you can get the art of writing sentences in a way that is hard to cut. Now they can take out entire paragraphs, but if you're professional and keep close to the word count, that is not so likely to happen. If they want 1500 words and you give them 3000 - more fool you. That gives them more to play with. My experience is, I don't get edited as heavily as I'd like.
She can whinge about being taken out of context but there was no way her most famous article could ever have had a more positive context, so I suspect she is being disingenuous, there.
Hmm not sure that I totally get this. Sam writes under her own name about her own experiences. If they are not true and have not happened then they are just downright lies - OK so its the Daily Mail and I wouldn't expect it to be completely truthful, but to create a completely different persona to what you are seems a bit strange. How about her husband and family, and friends, how do they feel about being talked about like that.
My guess is that she is in there to dig the dirt, and at the moment she is trying to gain the confidence of the housemates so she can store up some juicy stories for when she gets out.
No, it's not that they're downright lies, it's that they're exaggerated for effect and to create controversy. That's her MO. Trouble is, she's a very poor writer, and can't argue a point to save her life. She just seems very ordinary, not witty or clever or funny, just... dull. I don't think she'll make much of an impression on CBB and I can't see it doing anything for her, career-wise. She'll probably still trot out a few 'controversial' articles but I think they'll be met with indifference if not one long yawn since she's already shown how feeble and inept she is, in reality, at defending any of her 'beliefs'.
No, it's not that they're downright lies, it's that they're exaggerated for effect and to create controversy. That's her MO. Trouble is, she's a very poor writer, and can't argue a point to save her life. She just seems very ordinary, not witty or clever or funny, just... dull. I don't think she'll make much of an impression on CBB and I can't see it doing anything for her, career-wise. She'll probably still trot out a few 'controversial' articles but I think they'll be met with indifference if not one long yawn since she's already shown how feeble and inept she is, in reality, at defending any of her 'beliefs'.
I think you are probably right. When I was talking about downright lies, I was thinking of the complete strangers that keep coming up to her with flowers etc. Maybe a small child offered the 'pretty lady' a bunch of dandelions once.
She seems like many keyboard warriors TBH brave on the internet but a mouse in reality.
She was talking to one of the HMs and said she became controversial to earn money.
I suppose the competition is so fierce out there you have to do something to make yourself heard/noticed. Although I've never heard of her before BB seems a lot of people have.
No, it's not that they're downright lies, it's that they're exaggerated for effect and to create controversy. That's her MO. Trouble is, she's a very poor writer, and can't argue a point to save her life. She just seems very ordinary, not witty or clever or funny, just... dull. I don't think she'll make much of an impression on CBB and I can't see it doing anything for her, career-wise. She'll probably still trot out a few 'controversial' articles but I think they'll be met with indifference if not one long yawn since she's already shown how feeble and inept she is, in reality, at defending any of her 'beliefs'.
I couldn't have put it better myself. She rates beauty above personality, so no surprise that's she appears to be devoid of one.
What's not to like? Unfortunately she came into the house because of her controversial articles so it's not unreasonable for us to wonder where that extrovert blunt writer is in this quiet demure figure?
I hated it when she said 'out of context' because it was a down right lie and becuasue no one questioned her about the context. Coleen talked to her a bit about her work which is when she said she wrote what she wrote to bring home the bacon but if that isn't her and she has nothing much else to give us why is she there
I really thought, hoped I suppose that she'd be nominated as she seemed an easy target and then evicted as she is one I'd certainly not miss,
I couldn't believe it when she nominated Rhian, saying that Rhian judged her before talking to her in regards to the article where she wrote about Rhian's sexting....well, what a hypocrite!! Did SHE speak to Rhian before judging HER in that article?? She wrote about Rhian in a very negative way and made horrible judgements about her, for everyone to see, without ever talking to her, yet takes offence when Rhian is annoyed about it and is offended. :mad::mad::mad: Can't stand that mad person!
I didn't have much of an opinion as I've only read a few of her articles and never seen her in person. I guessed her column was a persona to make a good living - and by the looks of it she's got it just right. Bit like the Chick Lit authors who read English at Oxford and then write trash for the masses who lap it up.
They are fiction writers, and other than sometimes giving an overly romantic view of life are not doing any harm. Samantha writes as herself, and puts forward opinions as her own.
Seems like she lies to stay in the job she has to get paid. She also used that excuse to Colleen knowing Colleen would not push her on what she said because she mentioned she did it because she had a husband that was ill. The woman seems to be a liar when it suits her, and very quick at judging others but not wanting to be judged herself.
Oh you mean like many writers/performers/comedians who create a persona for the public that is far from their actual personalities in order to make a good living.
(Don't tell anyone but Paul Merton didn't really do woodwork CSE - he got A levels and worked for the Civil Service. :eek: )
I would expect comedians to be performers, fiction writers to create characters, and performers to be just that. However, I would expect a newspaper columnist to be a bit more factual. If it is all a persona for money, then why not create a persona? Why use her own photograph and write as if it is her opinion. I really don't understand the point.
I couldn't believe it when she nominated Rhian, saying that Rhian judged her before talking to her in regards to the article where she wrote about Rhian's sexting....well, what a hypocrite!! Did SHE speak to Rhian before judging HER in that article?? She wrote about Rhian in a very negative way and made horrible judgements about her, for everyone to see, without ever talking to her, yet takes offence when Rhian is annoyed about it and is offended. :mad::mad::mad: Can't stand that mad person!
I thought that.:eek: Rhian should have said something. mind you, she doesn't strike me as a very confident person.
I've heard some people believe everything they read. Didn't really realise it was accurate though.
The clue would be that she's writing about opinion - not fact. She's hardly Stephanie Flanders. But I guess it wouldn't sell unless people bought into it.
See that's what I don't get, either she is writing her own opinion, or someone else's which is it? If it is someone else's why wouldn't she say so?
Is anyone else surprised that Samantha Brick has become wallpaper? I thought should would be the controversial, opinionated one in there, but I have barely seen her. Maybe we should send in a search party.
I think she must be more vocal in the house than the HLs are showing, if only because she would've been an easy pick in the noms, yet she didn't get any.
Why does it have to be anyone's opinion? It's just an opinion to generate controversy. Anyone who is any good at debating can create two different arguments from the same material. She picks a side based on what is going to get most readers - and so far she's hitting the jackpot. That's not to say she never personally agrees with what she says - but whether she does or not is entirely irrelevant. She's not hired to tell people what she thinks - who cares about that when she isn't famous (or wasn't when she was hired) - she's hired to get people to read the paper. If the paper said 'read what this random unknown woman thinks about something' they wouldn't get many sales. But 'read this controversial opinion that's going to well and truly piss you off' - people can't resist.
OK if that's how it works I'm really glad I don't read that paper! I'm sorry but I still don't see how it is irrelevant whether she agrees with the opinions or not. Those articles mention by name her husband and some of her friends. Or are they made up as well? If not, then I would imagine that the articles would be very hurtful to them.
I doubt she is a proper journalist, just a features writer who did a lucky piece of trolling. She doesn't seem to have the journo's instinct for asking questions, getting under the skin of people. I want a HM to corner her and ask her some tough questions.
Yes, I think she tried, but she needs to be questioned and made to back up what she has written by a few more of them in there imo!
Given what she was saying about just writing to cause controversy, I think she was trying to make out she was a female version of Howard Stern but in a literary sense, or maybe even Jeremy Clarkson, but she really does not appear to have the where-with-all to carry it off! She just appears a bit dim, but maybe Teddybear 99 is right and she is just looking for fodder!
The annoying thing is she'll probably do or say nothing of any interest in there but then come out and write a scathing article about all the other HMs.
I think she must be more vocal in the house than the HLs are showing, if only because she would've been an easy pick in the noms, yet she didn't get any.
From a few fragments I think people think she's quite nice. Apparently she won Lorenzo's bachelor challenge for being nice to him and everyone was fine with it.
Haven't seen enough of her to know what her game is.
Comments
Nail on head.
She can whinge about being taken out of context but there was no way her most famous article could ever have had a more positive context, so I suspect she is being disingenuous, there.
Not my words but her arrogant excuse for all her writings because for her it is a win win situation.
No, it's not that they're downright lies, it's that they're exaggerated for effect and to create controversy. That's her MO. Trouble is, she's a very poor writer, and can't argue a point to save her life. She just seems very ordinary, not witty or clever or funny, just... dull. I don't think she'll make much of an impression on CBB and I can't see it doing anything for her, career-wise. She'll probably still trot out a few 'controversial' articles but I think they'll be met with indifference if not one long yawn since she's already shown how feeble and inept she is, in reality, at defending any of her 'beliefs'.
True. I'd love her gummy smile and thin hair.
I think you are probably right. When I was talking about downright lies, I was thinking of the complete strangers that keep coming up to her with flowers etc. Maybe a small child offered the 'pretty lady' a bunch of dandelions once.
She was talking to one of the HMs and said she became controversial to earn money.
I suppose the competition is so fierce out there you have to do something to make yourself heard/noticed. Although I've never heard of her before BB seems a lot of people have.
I couldn't have put it better myself. She rates beauty above personality, so no surprise that's she appears to be devoid of one.
What's not to like? Unfortunately she came into the house because of her controversial articles so it's not unreasonable for us to wonder where that extrovert blunt writer is in this quiet demure figure?
I hated it when she said 'out of context' because it was a down right lie and becuasue no one questioned her about the context. Coleen talked to her a bit about her work which is when she said she wrote what she wrote to bring home the bacon but if that isn't her and she has nothing much else to give us why is she there
I really thought, hoped I suppose that she'd be nominated as she seemed an easy target and then evicted as she is one I'd certainly not miss,
She must have the same dictionary as Luke S.
They are fiction writers, and other than sometimes giving an overly romantic view of life are not doing any harm. Samantha writes as herself, and puts forward opinions as her own.
I would expect comedians to be performers, fiction writers to create characters, and performers to be just that. However, I would expect a newspaper columnist to be a bit more factual. If it is all a persona for money, then why not create a persona? Why use her own photograph and write as if it is her opinion. I really don't understand the point.
I thought that.:eek: Rhian should have said something. mind you, she doesn't strike me as a very confident person.
See that's what I don't get, either she is writing her own opinion, or someone else's which is it? If it is someone else's why wouldn't she say so?
She is, yet another, keyboard warrior.
OK if that's how it works I'm really glad I don't read that paper! I'm sorry but I still don't see how it is irrelevant whether she agrees with the opinions or not. Those articles mention by name her husband and some of her friends. Or are they made up as well? If not, then I would imagine that the articles would be very hurtful to them.
Did Coleen not do that last night?
I ceiling what you did there
Yes, I think she tried, but she needs to be questioned and made to back up what she has written by a few more of them in there imo!
Given what she was saying about just writing to cause controversy, I think she was trying to make out she was a female version of Howard Stern but in a literary sense, or maybe even Jeremy Clarkson, but she really does not appear to have the where-with-all to carry it off! She just appears a bit dim, but maybe Teddybear 99 is right and she is just looking for fodder!
From a few fragments I think people think she's quite nice. Apparently she won Lorenzo's bachelor challenge for being nice to him and everyone was fine with it.
Haven't seen enough of her to know what her game is.