what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Get your science fix here: research, quackery, activism and all the rest
Post Reply
mikeh
Fuzzable
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:48 pm

what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by mikeh » Tue Nov 12, 2019 8:39 pm

Haven't heard anything of Not-Dr McKeith in a long time. Has she crawled under a quackery rock? Or am I just not looking in the right poo analytic circles?

Imrael
Stargoon
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:59 am

Re: what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by Imrael » Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:42 am

Not sure you want a real answer, but she was recently in the Daily Mail defending her right to wear weird fashion as 'empowering other women'. I'll leave actually reading the Mail to someone else.

mikeh
Fuzzable
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:48 pm

Re: what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by mikeh » Wed Nov 13, 2019 8:36 am

In a way, that's part of the problem. If those of us who don't read the Mail did read the Mail, the Mail would be less Mail-like.

If she's moving herself into (some sort of) world of fashion, then that explains why she's not dropped in front of my timeline recently. Maybe the days of horny goatweed are expunged into history.

User avatar
Stephanie
After Pie
Posts: 1923
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks

Re: what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by Stephanie » Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:04 pm

Imrael wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:42 am
Not sure you want a real answer, but she was recently in the Daily Mail defending her right to wear weird fashion as 'empowering other women'. I'll leave actually reading the Mail to someone else.
By the looks of it, her daughter is a fashion designer and she is wearing some of her stuff. The funds from the designs go to an organisation set up to help other designers get into fashion?
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."

tom p
Catbabel
Posts: 676
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by tom p » Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:44 pm

mikeh wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 8:36 am
In a way, that's part of the problem. If those of us who don't read the Mail did read the Mail, the Mail would be less Mail-like.
Would it? Or would it be exactly the same, but with a few more readers?

mikeh
Fuzzable
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:48 pm

Re: what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by mikeh » Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:04 pm

tom p wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:44 pm
mikeh wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 8:36 am
In a way, that's part of the problem. If those of us who don't read the Mail did read the Mail, the Mail would be less Mail-like.
Would it? Or would it be exactly the same, but with a few more readers?
Well, my hypothesis is thus - currently, companies that advertise in the Mail know their market. The adverts will be tailored accordingly. This is where most of the Mail-related profits come from.

If there was a significant enough influx of non-Mail readers being Mail-readers, the dynamics would change in terms of clicks on online adverts, below the line comments, and who-on-earth-still-does-this ads in the paper to send a postal order for £20 (and £4.99 P&P) and get a china plate with a white persons face on it.

Thus, the Mail itself would need to 'modernise', in part in response to feedback from advertisers that they've got shelves full of golliwogs that they cannot shift. So the content may change. The influx would obviously have to be in P=<0.05 significant enough numbers. Just you and me wouldn't help matters.

And if the Mods wish to siphon this off to its own thread, then a) blimey, and b) go ahead.

cvb
Clardic Fug
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 8:15 am

Re: what's gillian mckeith up to these days?

Post by cvb » Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:41 pm

mikeh wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:04 pm
tom p wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:44 pm
mikeh wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 8:36 am
In a way, that's part of the problem. If those of us who don't read the Mail did read the Mail, the Mail would be less Mail-like.
Would it? Or would it be exactly the same, but with a few more readers?
Well, my hypothesis is thus - currently, companies that advertise in the Mail know their market. The adverts will be tailored accordingly. This is where most of the Mail-related profits come from.

If there was a significant enough influx of non-Mail readers being Mail-readers, the dynamics would change in terms of clicks on online adverts, below the line comments, and who-on-earth-still-does-this ads in the paper to send a postal order for £20 (and £4.99 P&P) and get a china plate with a white persons face on it.

Thus, the Mail itself would need to 'modernise', in part in response to feedback from advertisers that they've got shelves full of golliwogs that they cannot shift. So the content may change. The influx would obviously have to be in P=<0.05 significant enough numbers. Just you and me wouldn't help matters.

And if the Mods wish to siphon this off to its own thread, then a) blimey, and b) go ahead.
There are problems with this approach.

You would have to read the Mail, well not really, but to have a real effect you would have to click on non golliwogs/white person plate adds enough so that it would affect the stats. I do not think many people are up for that.

The Mail are ideologically tw.ts so being twatish is what they do.

Post Reply