Samantha Brick has been chastised, rebuked and denigrated after striving for retribution for her apparently constantly affirmed beauty. She has been scorned as deluded, unattractive and effaced for daring to comment on her face. It’s no crime to proclaim your beauty, bemoan your advantages or brazenly assert your perceptions. The woman who previously described how she used her feminine wiles to progress to a mansion house and six-figure salary has caused scandal by detailing the horrors of aesthetic perfection.
Brick’s crime is neither vanity nor bragging. The self-aggrandiasing self-professed stunner doesn’t write a post-feminist discourse in the repression of female assertion but she does inempeachably prove what is and isn’t acceptable in the modern age. What Brick is most completely guilty of is delusions that the British public would be in any way receptive to the plight of the fortunate, the financed and finesse.
Cast your mind back to the vitrol that met the Cole family who fretted that they must sell their country estate (the ease of finding this article also demonstrating that everything on the internet lasts forever); think of the banishment and admonishment of the bonus culture; the spoils of success reported on any public figure who is not on a meritocratic or inexplicable pedestal in the cult of celebrity is resented. They all meet disdain and are lambasted with insinuations of delusion, arrogance and gratuitous gluttony.
Samantha by all accounts should posses a certain amount of media savvy. As a journalist and television worker she should understand the vital nature of communication and perception. Brick seems to have ardently lived by the claim that publicity is neither negative nor positive, only existant. She also has made the misdeamnor that what is communicated in the media is a forum of open debate – it’s not. Idols are lauded because of taste and appropriation of public mood, while deviating from the current austerity or incumbent struggles of life (whether economic, political or prejudicial) will isolate you from the mass you’re trying to communicate with. Whatever the intent: do not shroud yourself in a naivety that as an opinion journalist you are breaking news or revealing truths – you must always speak to a majority who shares your opinion.
Samantha Brick is a victim of not knowing her audience: it would be strongly inadvisable to tell a Hijacking joke on a Boeing 747, and most unwelcome to hand out and deliberate over carpet-samples in New Orleans circa 2005. Brick lays claim to earning 6 figures in the media yet seems bewildered and devastated she is receiving the very modern backlash: viral spoofs, an accelerated Twitter newsfeed. Still, at least she remains as ‘popular’ as she has ever been. And not just with the opposite sex.
Whether a scheme for publicity, another piece of evidence for the trial against sensationalist limits by the Daily Mail or taking the place of next fad target: Samantha Brick either should have known better even if she was just the slightest bit galled by the ridicule she’s facing. Rule one of playing the media game: don’t load your own execution weapon.