Earlier this week, the Daily Mail learned a very important lesson when it comes to deciphering star sign jewelry — there’s a big difference between being a Leo and dating actor Leo DiCaprio.
Over the past several days, 28-year-old Love Island host Maya Jama has emerged as the British tabloids' latest darling, several outlets perpetuating the now-debunked whispers that she and the 48-year-old Titanic star were “secretly dating,” as The Sun claimed last week.
Maya Jama wears gold 'Leo' necklace in bikini-clad video after those Leonardo DiCaprio romance rumours https://t.co/eScMXAetJJ pic.twitter.com/MIZuauABM1
— Daily Mail Online (@MailOnline) April 10, 2023
Amid their coverage of the pair’s bogus romance, rumors DiCaprio’s camp denied, Daily Mail honed in on a piece of jewelry the presenter sported in a recent Instagram post, running an article entitled “Maya Jama wears gold 'Leo' necklace in bikini-clad video after those Leonardo DiCaprio romance rumours.”
“Maya Jama was pictured wearing a gold 'Leo' necklace in a recent video after the Hollywood actor denied dating rumours,” they commenced the article.
I’ve been minding my business on holiday & said I wouldn’t respond/pay attention to any of the silly stories anymore but you need to stop now, that is literally my star sign. We are not dating. Move on please https://t.co/p5vTTpSiWz
— Maya Jama (@MayaJama) April 11, 2023
Though several paragraphs later, the piece noted that Jama’s August 14 birthday meant that she is astrologically a Leo, the reality TV maven was evidently fed up with the endless speculation, taking to Twitter to denounce the article and the rumors as a whole.
“I’ve been minding my business on holiday & said I wouldn’t respond/pay attention to any of the silly stories anymore but you need to stop now, that is literally my star sign,” she penned in a quote tweet of the publications’ piece. “We are not dating. Move on please.”
They been dragging the story for the past week this was my last straw
— Maya Jama (@MayaJama) April 11, 2023
Daily Mail has yet to respond to Jama’s post.
0 Comments