Paper Monitor
10:27 UK time, Thursday, 14 December 2006
A service highlighting the riches of the daily press.
Another day, another opportunity for the Daily Mail to insidiously make its core readership - women - feel just that little bit bad about themselves.
Firing yet another salvo in the ongoing size zero debate, the paper has asked four women - ranging from size 16 to size eight - to be snapped in their smalls.
"What did these women (and their men) think when our computer slimmed down their real-life bodies to size zero?" the paper asks. "With a 22-inch waist the shape is striking - as are the health implications. But how would you look?"
What does Beth, a UK size 16, think of her new look? "My arms look undernourished and my face looks sharp and mean." And her fiance? "I definitely couldn't fancy anyone that bony... in her case, big is beautiful."
How about Gemma, a UK size 14? "I don't like either version of me but I prefer the torso of my size zero body." And size 12 Cassandra says: "If only I had those thighs."
Aye, there's the rub, eh ladies? Dinner for those size zero starlets may consist of half an asparagus spear, but don't they look good in slinky little outfits (bar the visible collarbones and pinched look in their eyes)?
Meanwhile, the Daily Express hedges its bets with not one but two splash front pages, split exactly in half. On the left: "RIPPER: TWO MORE NAKED BODIES". On the right (can you guess?): "DIANA: WHY WERE 18 KEY WITNESSES IGNORED BY INQUIRY?" Apparently they gave statements to the police - "many suggesting there was more to the Princess's death than a simple accident". Sounds like a conspiracy to Paper Monitor.
The 
