Subscribe: Subscribe to me on YouTube

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

I've spent most of today writing the departmental newsletter at work, and publishing gratuitous pictures of cake, but as it transpires, I haven't just been writing for the NHS recently. I've also been writing for The Daily Mail. Although I wasn't aware of it until yesterday.

When I came home from work last night and checked my visitor logs, I discovered that someone at Associated Newspapers had been reading my blog...

It was just your average everyday visit of 2 hours, 58 minutes and 43 seconds. Nothing unusual, obviously. In particular, they were interested in the post I wrote a month ago about the Winfield employment tribunal, which was the focus of roughly 2 hours and 57 minutes of their visit.

Associated Newspapers own the Daily Mail, which is interesting because I can name a lot of things that cause cancer, and I'm quite judgemental about travellers and people with cellulite. I assumed they were drawn to my article because it concerns a drugged-up benefits scrounger who refuses to work, just because she's in a hospital bed with a newborn baby.

It was puzzling though, because that tribunal isn't really news. The case took place last year, and the judgement was published at the end of November, so the story's already seven months out of date. I thought I was a bit behind the times when I wrote about it in May.

But not as behind as The Mail. They published the story yesterday...

That was 2 hours, 58 minutes and 43 seconds well spent. Shame I didn't get a byline.


Phil's Mum said...

I should sue the Mail for pinching your story.  You might get £18,000 compensation!

Peter Chapman said...

VERY cheeky. I'd email them with your webstats and get them to at least thank you.