gossip_guy
VIP Member
She's just put a lot of her abundant free time and money into looking good on paper. She also had the benefit of a Masters being infinitely less competitive (especially the degree she chose), along with her course not requiring an interview and her having a spare £30-40,000 to waste on it.I dunno. I don't think anyone gets onto a Masters course at Oxbridge without having some kind of talent or aptitude, right? No matter how many times they try.
Her CV will look impressive to someone unaware of her history of embellishment and dishonesty. On paper, all the wildly exaggerated experience and accomplishments that she secured purely through nepotism, wealth and influencer privilege will probably paint a picture of someone intelligent and with a huge passion for education and literature.
She has a First-class degree to show them now, and they'll naturally have no idea that she relied almost entirely on other people's work (and grade inflation) to get it. A carefully curated personal statement highlighting all the degree-relevant stuff on her CV (like the Emily Dickinson free tours that she spun as work experience, or her nepo job at her old private school), plus namedropping Oxford lecturers she's met/Googled would've done the heavy lifting to get her accepted.
But there's no evidence of intelligence or talent in anything she does online that I've ever seen, and that's her putting on her best performance to look intelligent. Literally every time she speaks, she says something objectively wrong, profoundly stupid or utterly nonsensical. If this was undergrad again, she'd be rejected right away because an interview where she can't choose (or steal) her words very carefully would highlight what a Swiss-cheese-brained moron she is (the exact problem she had when first interviewed at Oxford and got rejected). The only thing she's remotely good at is cheating the system.