Daily Mail Kate Hypocrisy

Yesterday, the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre ordered his obedient hackery over the top in pursuit of the latest hate campaign, against double Booker Prize winning author Hilary Mantel, who had been perceived – wrongly – to have attacked the Duchess Of Cambridge. Indeed, the supposed “attack” (which was over a fortnight old) was said to have been “venomous”.

Who're you calling a f***ing hypocrite, c***?!?

So we can be quite certain that anyone having a go at Kate is Not To Be Tolerated. Well, one Zelo Street regular has helpfully dropped the name to me of one pundit who has been doing rather a lot of attacking the Duchess, and her family, in the recent past. The attacks have been personal, mean spirited, and utterly gratuitous. But there has been no condemnation from the Mail.

Take this article, for starters: “It will take more than just great looks to be a Princess”. Kate had “little ambition to ­succeed ... beyond a part-time job with a fashion company and helping out with her family’s mail order business”. Yes, she was “without a proper job or meaningful role”. And there was talk of a “Princess Pushy in the making”. And, as the man said, there’s more.

“Her Royal Highness is turning into Her Royal Hairness” proclaimed another article, telling how “her face was completely obliterated by a cascade of dark curls. She would flick it out of the way, fondle and fiddle with it and I lost count of the number of times she had to tuck it behind her ear”, then putting the knife in and twisting it with “she looked like Cousin It from the Addams Family – all hair, no person”.

Then there was an attack on Kate’s red dress at the Thames Pageant: “she could have been confused with the Chelsea Pensioners’ guard of honour ... inappropriate ... I blame her family ... sleeveless version was previously worn by ... Kim Kardashian and ... Tulisa Contostavlos” (mee-ow!). Ah yes, the Middleton family – there was plenty of venom directed at them, too.

“I worry the Middletons really do believe they are royalty” warned another piece. “Why, for example, were Pippa and her brother James in the royal box at Wimbledon last week? Not because of their party-planning and cake-baking credentials, that’s for sure”. At a guess, because someone invited them, but what the heck, it’s clearly an attack to order on a target that won’t answer back.

And it will surprise no-one that all these catty and, yes, venomous attacks on the Duchess of Cambridge were penned by one of the Daily Mail’s bevy of appalling Glendas: step forward Amanda Platell. Clearly, having a kick at the Royals is OK, provided the Vagina Monologue orders it. Thus Paul Dacre is once again left standing in a very draughty glasshouse.

He then hopes the readers will forget, and keep buying. No change there, then.