Media

Dec 13, 2016

The complex economics of photographing Sam Armytage’s grundies

Pictures of the Sunrise host won't make anyone rich -- but they are a reliable, steady earner for Sydney's paparazzi.

Myriam Robin — Media Reporter

Myriam Robin

Media Reporter

When the Daily Mail published a photo of Sunrise host Sam Armytage with a visible panty line (“giant granny panties”, said the Mail, though entertainment reporter Peter Ford said Armytage had told him it was swimwear), a world of outrage was unleashed upon the British website.

18 comments

Leave a comment

18 thoughts on “The complex economics of photographing Sam Armytage’s grundies

  1. mikeb

    That’s what happens when you get paid a lot of money for being a network (face/bottom) and doing very little.

  2. AR

    Colour me Aghast, TL;DR but well done Myriam for persevering.

  3. Mark Egelstaff

    Even though I sit in front of a computer all day, watching the scroll of news stories flick between the various sites, never have I thought of seeing what was on the Daily Mail website. It doesn’t even register as an afterthought.
    However, I’m more than aware of whatever underwear Ms Armytage might have been wearing, because it was reported on all the other news sites. Aren’t these sites just playing straight into the hands of whatever mastermind is running the Daily Mail site? “Quick, post a picture of Sam, those other idiots will run the story and create moral outrage and we’ll be able to charge even more for our Outreach ad links to 12 surprising pictures of journalists being idiots…”
    Far be it from me to quote a former Prime Minister, but maybe they just shouldn’t write – or copy – sh*t?

  4. Itsarort

    Sunrise…? It either pops-up over the ocean (generally while I’m still tucked away under the covers) or it comes in a long glass with tequila and an itty-bitty umbrella. And WTF are Sam and Karl?

  5. zut alors

    High profile media ‘personalities’ have the benefit of daily perks – all manner of upgradings, freebies & considerations wherever they go. A price is extracted for their special treatment – it involves mud being thrown & defamatory or borderline defamatory dreck being published about their professional & private lives.

    The Daily Mail appears to peddle mind-numbing & sensational piffle, easily baiting a demographic of dumbed down consumers. Clearly, there’s a hungry market for this drivel &, equally clearly, ‘personalities’ need to steel themselves to accept the rules of the game & the consequences once they become a name.

  6. John Falconer

    Two things:
    1. I’ve never heard of Sam Armytage. Now I have,
    2. I live in Thailand where the Daily Mail has long been on an internet “blocked” list.
    Both sound good top me.
    John Falconer

  7. Dog's Breakfast

    Lord help us. I don’t know, I’m not going to their site to look at it, perhaps there was some derogatory commentary other than ‘giant grannie panties’, but if that’s it, it’s all a bit lame isn’t it.

    Really, is this misogynist or just celebrity BS world.

    I just came here from a story by Helen Razer remarking about journalism being based on the logic of the playground. This isn’t even that advanced (the episode itself, not your coverage Myriam)

    The world is F …… Oh, you know how that sentence ends.

  8. scot mcphee

    Although I would consider myself very well versed in news and current affairs and world politics, I have to admit I did not even know who Sam Armytage was until this affair erupted. But then I don’t watch commercial TV (or broadcast TV much in general) and certainly I rarely visit the Daily Mail. Where does this quote come from? “Given the familiarity people have with Sam and Karl, I can understand people being so significantly invested and delving into their lives” … I am constantly amazed at commercial TV’s and “celebrity gossip mags” continuing grip on the nation. Why?

  9. Daniel Sharp

    Hilarious article…….For the person who takes the photo, it is a technical exercise for money……the people ‘who work the treatment’ at the Daily Mail may be male or female..I’m betting mainly female…the readers are apparently women……the photo subject is a woman going about her ‘day-to-day’ who works in a media format close to this terrain……then several female columnists get this thing trending for 24 hours through their moral outrage over the apparent misogyny of it…..I kind of like Sam Armytage but I’ve never thought of her that way….Am I bad?

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...