Samantha Brick has become one of the first internet victims of the year.
Brick - producer, journalist, writer - published an article titled "There are downsides to looking this pretty: Why women hate me for being beautiful", which as you can imagine provoked one hell of a shitstorm. I'm a firm believer that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but the average human being might need a few drinks to consider Samantha Brick desirable, or even enviable.
I have no real interest towards the tone of the article, nor am I offended, but it's rather the success that the Daily Mail have enjoyed in publishing this article that interests me.
An obvious joy of digital publishing, without paywalls, is the viral effect in which compelling or provocative articles can be shared with ease of which the publisher can reap the benefits.
Sources say that in the first day the Samantha Brick article it accrued 1.5M page views, which with a £20 CPM rate card, would net the Daily Mail £30,000. That's excluding on-site/affiliate advertising which will amount to a much greater number. Not bad for a story that couldn't be less news-worthy.
The big question is, was this article a real, genuine, message from Samantha Brick to share with the world? Or was it contrived in some way by the Daily Mail? Lets face it.... they don't have the best reputation for good intentions in their reporting.
...I could go on.