Can the media do that? I genuinely didn't realise that was a thing. How horrible
Sadly, this is where the likes of Daily Mail get their "stories" from - the writers are so under the pump to produce something - anything - that they will scour subjects' social media for ideas, then create a whole story out of one post, adding all the back history in there too, to keep it lengthy, remind readers of the back story, and encourage comments. Anything that attracts the clicks - which stories about Lisa and Ant typically do - is constantly on their 'hot list' of things to write about.
I honestly don’t get this teamAnt or teamLisa stuff. How can you take such a definitive stance on the marriage breakdown of two total strangers. None of us know enough about what really went on in their private life to be “team” either one of them. You really can’t base an opinion on what you read in the media. The media isn’t there to tell the truth or go into the complexities that lead to relationship break ups. The media just write whatever is legally possible that will sell the most papers or get the most hits online. This social media phenomenon of people taking very definitive views on stuff they really know very little about baffles me.
Speaking personally, I was Lisa. I had my whole life ripped out from underneath me in a flash. It really hurts when you weren't the one who chose to end things. And it's 100% worse for her, being a public figure.
But do you know that for a fact?
This is how PR companies work.
Example: There is a woman, Sharon Finnigan, who runs a talent agency. Here are her clients:
Our talents are available to work with clients on ambassadorial and sponsorship roles, media work, endorsements, event appearances and public speaking opportunities.
www.sfmanagement.com.au
Now go to the Daily Mail Australia page and see how many articles there are about these people. Commenters constantly ask,
"Why is Phoebe here all the time - she's only famous for previously being married to a footy star" - well, she's there because her PR pays for her to be. Depending on budget, the comments will be moderated.
On the flipside however, the Daily Mail will also write about her in less than flattering terms if it's guaranteed to get clicks - for example, in articles mentioning her very public split from the footy star.
If the article is flattering or promotional, it's come from PR; if it's not, it's come from the opposition.
I used to work for a PR firm and one of my first jobs of the day was to go through all the Google alerts mentioning the talent they managed. I would prepare a report summarising what had been written about them for the agency to either respond to (often in a crisis management capacity if the talent had done something bad, which happened a lot!), or just keep watch on.
A lot of the stuff we read about is just manufactured drama.
My sympathies are very much with Lisa, however I do wonder why she doesn't just lose all her followers (except those she knows personally) and set her account to private ... I have to wonder if she realises that by the media continuing to write about her keeps her profile up (the only thing worse than being written about in a negative way is being ignored completely).