A mild amusement about Melissa Kite pictures

This is, I agree, entirely trivial. However.

Melissa Kite’s photo at the Telegraph.

melissakitetelegraph

OK, so that’s a little older than these next two.

Melissa Kite at The Mail.

MelissaKitemail

And Melissa Kite at The Guardian.

Melissa-Kiteguardian

Those last two are current: although obviously they need not have been taken at the same time.

Now if you were making sure that you carefully differentiated your brand for different newspaper markets is that the way that you would do it? Bit of the free spirit hippie chick for The G and a more restrained and tamed hairstyle for the Mail?

Yes, I think it would be. And doesn’t that tell us something interesting about the perception of the audience at those different places?

OK, very mildly interesting perhaps….

12 comments on “A mild amusement about Melissa Kite pictures

  1. Dunno – it is probably done by the staff photographers for the papers so that they retain the copyright. That, of course, tells us something about how the papers’ operators see their audiences perception of women.

    Which is probably more interesting than Melissa Kite’s perception of the same.

  2. The mystery is how such a totally vacuous bint manages to get gigs at three national dailies. She gives good blow jobs?

  3. Interesting that the Grauniad picture is the – er – plainest. I guess when there’s a couple of world-class bus-ends like Toynbee and Ashley on your books you have to make a real effort.

    I hope she went to private school by the way – we don’t want just anyone writing for the G.

  4. Oh, absolutely!

    Looking on Google Image Search, either the Guardian photo has been very badly processed somewhere along the way, or else it’s been run through some sort of filter to reduce colour saturation to give off an air of “girl who’s just come back from backpacking in Thailand on her gap year”.

  5. You can tell what the people at papers think is missing in their writers by what they want to suggest in their pictures.

    Clearly people at the Guardian know they are no fun at all so they have to show Ms Kite looking like she just came back from a beach party. People at the Mail know they are thick so they want her to look intellectual.

    But what is the problem at the Telegraph?

  6. Why do we need a bloody photograph over someone’s vapourings? Bylines and opinion pieces have replaced good old fashioned journalism. The msm have decided we are too squeamish for hard facts and hardboiled cynicism hence the fluffy images of middle class windbags. Tim, should you ever put a selfportrait up, I shall remove my dyspepsia to darker regions of the internet.

  7. When I used to write for student newspapers, I met a mediumly-well-known columnist at an event who told me you should always choose your second best current photo to go with your byline. Because (I paraphrase slightly, this was well over a decade ago) “obviously you want a good photo, to show you in your best light. But what you don’t want people to do is meet you having seen your byline photo and think ‘fuck me they’ve let themselves go a bit, haven’t they?”.

    Good advice, that.

  8. It’s obvious what Tim’s photo at Forbes is meant to convey.

    Unfortunately they cropped out the fluffy white cat, but he’s clearly saying “Greetings, Mister Bond…”

  9. I’m more interested in whether your appearance constrains the subjects or style of your writing.

  10. From reading her personal column in the back of the Spectator, which doesn’t have a photograph, I assumed she was late 30s.

    Looks somewhat older in all the photographs.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.