For those of you who haven't gotten wind of this, here is the full-page spread that appeared in Sunday Life! yesterday on Instagram fashionista Jamie Chua that has caused a lot of tsk tsking and head-shaking.

It is basically a voyeuristic look at the life of Singapore's preeminent socialite-divorcee Jamie Chua, 39, and what floats her boat.

The article paints a portrait of a woman who is the equivalent of the Paris Hilton of Singapore. Her life surrounds designer bags, shoes, clothes, wardrobe changes, personal make-up assistants and her two maids who take turns to take photos of her for her Instagram.

The story even caused ex-Straits Times editor, Bertha Henson, to cry out loud and almost burst a vein while critiquing the article saying it served no purpose other than glorify the life of someone from the top 1 percent and seed envy in ordinary people.

Bertha wrote: "So what’s the point of this article except to make its readers gasp, gape and gawk? Or is that the point?"

Yeah man. Why even cover this story? There is no news value whatsoever.

The real news value is that there is none

Well, perhaps there is another purpose.

Now let's just simply change the lens that we use to read the article.

What if -- and let's just say it is not entirely impossible -- the reporter, Akshita Nanda, was simply being sarcastic, but in a very subtle way so as not to offend her subject?

If you, as the reader, are smart enough to read between the lines, it would start to make sense.

[quip float="pqright"]If you, as the reader, are smart enough to read between the lines, it would start to make sense[/quip]

This is an article about a very rich woman who is buying expensive things she doesn't need, paid for with alimony money by someone who doesn't even love her anymore.

If 89,000 Instagram fans is the validation she needs and if that's the point of the article, then this story is basically an exposé on what vacuousness is like.

Now that's the news worthiness that Sunday Life! could not actually print. Or articulate.

But that's what we as readers can read and take away.

And I'm surprised Bertha Henson with her news editing experience has failed to spot that.

So here's the deal: The socialite can nod approvingly and go away feeling flattered that this was an excellent coverage about her.

The plebeians can go away feeling like they've just come face-to-face with the walking definition of vacuousness.

Everyone's happy.

No amount of journalism school can teach you how to write like that.

Top photos from Jamie Chua Instagram.