Really? That's what you're fixating on?

TV Ooh look, the Telegraph's decided to have a go about Doctor Who being sexed up.

"The return of Doctor Who to television screens on Saturday night has led to a host of complaints and comments on online message boards that it is 'too sexy'."

Oooh look, The Mail have rewritten the same story for themselves except in their case:

"The revealing outfit prompted a flood of comments on online message boards, with a section of fans accusing producers of 'shamelessly sexing up' the long-running family show and labelling it 'slutty'."

Here it is again at the Metro. After spending a few paragraph lasciviously describing the "offending" scenes all the articles offer these unattributed comments. Both of them. Hardly a host or flood is it?

'Why did she dress up as a tarty policewoman? Surely that's not fitting for a family show.'

Another said: 'They've completely demeaned Doctor Who by replacing good episode stories with slutty girls.'

The Digital Spy people have gone to work and found that the second incoherent mumble is from a Yahoo Answers thread. They seem to think the other comment is a rewrite of something from their own forums but this blog entry also has the phrase "tarty policewoman". Either way, googling that quote doesn't reveal a source and neither are from anyone who could be considered from somewhere fans congregate as they suggest.

Both articles shift towards the positive at the end with some other unattributed quotes from interviews given to other papers and a quote from the Points of View forum (as though the rest of the web isn't awash with such things) but who reads that far down? But really? That's what you're fixating on?

And why are you implying one thing without being able to offer the comments and sources to back it up?