Top Stories

People Magazine: NY Times is Bogus

People Magazine: NY Times is Bogus

Larry Hackett, managing editor for People magazine, just sent this email to staffers to address the recent NYTimes piece titled “Angelina Jolie’s Carefully Orchestrated Image”:

“I don’t normally address press stories about how we do our business here at People. But today’s New York Times pg. 1 story about Angelina Jolie requires a response. In the lede, the story strongly suggests that People, while negotiating for the twins pictures, had explicit conversations about our “editorial plan” and made ‘a promise’ that coverage would be positive.

“These sorts of stories have appeared in media gossip columns before. I have ignored them in the past as the unfortunate fallout of competition and sour grapes. But today’s story, in a much different venue, takes these rumors to a new level, so let me be absolutely clear: The suggestion that we have ever made any promise of positive coverage, or have submitted an editorial plan, is completely false. That I or anyone else would promise, on paper or verbally, to purposely slant coverage as condition for acquiring pictures, is insulting to all of us.

“Here’s what is true: Celebrities-and senators and business executives and athletes-are always trying to bend stories their way. We deal with that pressure every single day and engage in many conversations regarding all elements of coverage. Angelina Jolie is very candid about wanting attention for her charitable efforts, and we have covered many of them because we believe they are interesting stories. But in doing so, we have never relinquished editorial control. There have been occasions when her goals and our needs could not be reconciled, and we have walked away, as we have with countless other story subjects.

“In our coverage of both celebrities and everyday people, People certainly often celebrates their accomplishments and milestones. To say that our coverage of Angelina Jolie has not been admiring would be disingenuous. But the suggestion in today’s Times that this ‘positive’ coverage is codified and promised is totally bogus, and needs to be rejected.”

Just Jared on Facebook
Posted to: Angelina Jolie

JJ Links Around The Web

  • Common is speaking out about Kanye and Kim's baby Chicago - TMZ
  • Dylan Minette is teasing 13 Reasons Why season two - Just Jared Jr
  • Kim Cattrall is making suggestions for her replacement in Sex and the City 3 - TooFab
  • The first trailer for Al Pachino's Paterno is here - The Hollywood Reporter
  • Demi Lovato is opening up about her body insecurities - Just Jared Jr
  • haha


  • ca


  • pratifox

    Who cares either way.

    Oh… *waits for gazillion posts claiming otherwise*

  • Orchid

    I’m glad People decided to answer the NYT.

  • RC

    who gives a crap?

  • dialectic

    yeah because i would totally believe people magazine of the NY times

  • chloe

    Ny Times has been sinking for a while now.

    They gave the 14 mil$ to CHARITY. duh.
    Angie has been a UNCHR ambassador for 8 yrs.

    NY Times is desperado & liars.


    She should of given the 16 million dollars to the Africian relief and built
    them some home to go back to instead she sits in a filthy tent in her
    black hooded wrap and talks about how they need help… What charity
    the Jolie-Pitt foundation aka for the kids.. and their lavish lifestyle?

    Duh tell us what charity is was.. so what if she was an ambassador
    for the UNCHR.. she has done squat for them..Just her videos…
    put her money to good use…

  • nyt sux

    Two words:

    Judith. Miller. NYT

    A reporter most singlehandedly responsible for spreading the neo-con LIES in the Iraq War, killing 1.6 milloon, wounding half million, and killing 5000 U.S. military.

    This is proven FACT.

    Between her, and Jason Blair – this paper has been sh*t for a looooong time.

  • a total fan

    Finally ! I always knew she used her status to bring awarness to her charities, but I never believed she used it to put herself in a “positive” light. She can careless about what people think about her,she is too busy with her family and just living life.

  • lolo

    nothing new, the media keeping repeating the samething and it is getting boring, let her live her life.

  • jessie

    The NY Times need to get a grip! Do they just need to pick on somebody? Why don’t they write about more relevant things and news worthy topics? The fact that Ms. Jolie have done more good that most if not all hollywood stars is worth mentioning. I am tired of the media almost printing lies and bad news. The way the economy and the world is heading to these days, bad publicity and dire news only fans the fire and achieves nothing but build more hostility, anger, mistrust and sadness among humankind.

  • This is NOT a NEW thread

    ..and NO, this is still NOT a new thread. Keep posting in Brad/Oprah.

    That is all.

  • bdj

    Angelina is a talented Actress, devoted Mom and Humanitarian. The media is obsessed with her and is making her an iconic legend of our generation. Whether you like her or not, the main thing is that people(mainly hens) cannot ignore her. She has been lied on, smeared on and her past brought up in many articles. Yet AJ continues to live her life and love her family. She seems to have it all and this bothers many. I admire her intelligence, talent, strength and conviction to her causes. All the tabloid BS, PR manufactured triangle and ranting from crazed nutjobs are just a minor inconvenience in reading about a woman who walks the talk. Keep on Keeping on Angelina Jolie. It is always good to leave the haters in the dust.

  • CMAR

    HAAAAAA……HA! (As bart simpson would say).

    Kudos to PEOPLE for putting this hack in his place and in doing so, throw light on the trashloid-little secret that the NYT harbors within its ‘hallowed’ pages.

    Journallism is no longer about strict lines of demarcation between ‘news’ and the opinions and commentary of the so-called writers who are no longer content just to report the facts. Everybody wants their 15 minutes. Everybody wants to give his or her spin on things and in the process, foul up the facts, as this so-called ‘writer’ of the piss poor hatchet job on Angie tried to do. (A page one article???!! i know media is feeling the economic downturn pretty hard but……man! i guess its worse than i thought LOL.

    Anyhoo……seems to me the next step is to point the spotlight on this so-called ‘writer’. When writers insert themselves and their biases so blatantly into stories, its time to find out who they are, who ‘pays’ them and what their real agenda is!!!!

  • Besane

    NYTimes has a lot of contributing writers. This one, Brooks Barns, again, probably is one of the women whose partner left her, or had an experience of a failed relationship which she never accounted herself for. Angelina’s critics are often themselves very insecure women who are extremely threatened by Angelina’s self-assured, honest life style. They can’t take it.

  • Ms.JOLIE4ever!

    Everyone wants a piece of Angie.

  • FireBack

    I was waiting for this site to make a post in her defense…


    I’m just kidding Angelina Jolie is the MOST ADMIRED PHILANTHROPIST ON THE PLANET, SECOND sandwiched between Bono & Oprah.

    I mean, here we are arguing about how and in which way she can donate her millions to the poor, and actually discussing what she’s wearing when she’s sitting in war-torn dangerous area bringing attention to suffering refugees…I was just kidding talking about her black outerwear – those are clothes she had to wear to respect customs.

    I mean, you guys know I’m kidding right??

    Why would I be so critical of a woman doing so much for others?

    It’s not like she’s Jennifer Aniston getting mani-pedis, and living with her colorist and hair stylist, or getting brazillians for her weekly beach shots. Now THAT is something to be critical of. She could spend her 100 million on someone other than her fake asss’d self, but she doesn’t – she chases obnoxious boytoys around the world and snaps photos offstage. Wow, what a role model. If the NYT says Angelina is ‘scary smart,’ she must ‘horrifingly DUMB.’ Hahaha.

  • bdj

    Emotional Jolie takes no prisoners

    By Liam Allen
    Entertainment reporter, BBC News

    Angelina Jolie in Changeling – clip courtesy of Universal Pictures.

    The excitement in the room is palpable.

    The buzz, which manifests itself as lively chatter, is not one usually associated with experienced and sometimes cynical journalists.

    And with the star of the show apparently running late, all eyes turn to the door each time it opens – only to be disappointed by the sight of late colleagues rather than a late Angelina Jolie.

    The 33-year-old is in London to promote new film Changeling – the harrowing true story of Christine Collins whose son, Walter, went missing in Los Angeles in 1928.

    When the press conference – at the swanky Claridge’s hotel – eventually begins, Jolie explains that “the hardest thing” about playing Collins was that the character is relatively passive.

    As a mum, it was horrible and I had my kids with me as much as possible at work and, after doing the day at work, I would just run home and I just wanted to be silly
    Angelina Jolie on Changeling

    Jolie’s tears for her late mother

    “I couldn’t relate to it,” says Jolie, suggesting her reputation as a tough cookie is not too wide of the mark.

    But within seconds, Jolie – looking stunning in a plain dark olive green jumper – is fighting back tears.

    And the journalists have their story.

    She pauses to compose herself as she explains how she based her performance on her “really, really sweet” actress mother, Marcheline Bertrand – who died last year.

    It is this softer, emotional side of Jolie that pervades the rest of the press conference as she talks affectionately about her family.

    ‘Very goofy’

    Jolie says Changeling, directed by Clint Eastwood, was “a very hard film for all of us to make”.

    Angelina Jolie as Christine Collins
    Jolie is being tipped for a best actress Oscar for Changeling

    The movie, which is being tipped for best picture and best actress Oscars, tells the story of Collins’s fight for the truth after police officers return a different child to her, claiming it is her son.

    When she tries to force them to admit they have the wrong boy and to resume the search, she is thrown into a psychiatric ward.

    “As a mum, it was horrible and I had my kids with me as much as possible at work and, after doing the day at work, I would just run home and I just wanted to be silly.

    “It was so emotional that I found myself just being very, very goofy.”

    She says her four-month old twins, Vivienne Marcheline and Knox Leon, are “upstairs – hopefully sleeping”.

    ‘Wrapping presents’

    Asked if she and the other half of Hollywood’s most famous couple, Brad Pitt, plan to expand their family – which already numbers six children – Jolie replies: “Sure you can.”
    Jolie and Pitt with children Zahara and Maddox
    Jolie says she and Pitt are looking forward to “doing the stockings”

    A big family Christmas is planned in the “Brangelina” household, she says.

    “We’re usually exhausted by Christmas Eve.

    “We love it – it’s that fun of sitting up in the middle of the night and wrapping the presents together and doing the stockings and all that kind of stuff.

    “It’s kind of the best thing about being a mom and dad.”

    Such is the graceful emotion exuded by Jolie that, when a journalist asks how she is feeling in herself after the recent “extremes” of losing her mother and giving birth to twins, she actually thanks him for asking.

    But anyone who thinks she has lost her edge should think again.

    Jolie with her best actress Oscar in 2000
    Jolie won the best supporting actress Oscar for Girl, Interrupted in 2000

    The same press man’s follow-up question is met with an icy stare.

    “There was a lot of focus on how thin you looked during the shooting of the film and in the film. I just wondered if you’re healthier now?” he asks.

    “I think that’s an odd question,” she replies simply.

    As the press conference goes on, it can only be a matter of time before someone asks Jolie the killer question – how does she respond to Jennifer Aniston’s claims that she romanced Pitt while he was still married to the Friends actress?

    Whoever asks it may well get the cold shoulder from an actress who clearly takes no prisoners.

    But the chance of taking the prize of a headline-grabbing retort back to editors is surely too good to miss. Isn’t it?

    No-one dares ask.

  • Chris

    Glad that this was finally said. The NY Times is struggling to keep their paper afloat. They have create drama to get readership. Sad but so true. Brooks Barnes is an idiot but the worst culprits are the editors that let her piece of garbage article run on the first page.

  • Reporter using AJ to make name

    Brooks Barnes is a guy who looks frighteningly like Clay Aiken, only a LOT less macho. lmao

  • none

    well if the “good coverage” exsist .. shouldnt it be part of the deal that pepople HAS TO response to such stories Just saying

  • nicole

    Thank you Jared.

    God Bless the Jolie-Pitt’s always and forever .

  • hmm

    How dare Angelina try to bring the focus to her charity? Seriously, the NYT is upset because she cares about her image as if that is different from any other celeb. She has been uncharacteristically honest in her interviews and still some in the media try to negate every good thing that she has done. The fact that article talked about her humanitarian efforts as a way to smooth over her relationship with Brad is beyond ridiculous because she was involved in those causes before meeting Brad. So, one has to wonder if the author had something to gain by his misleading article and it would be interesting to know who his sources are and WHO they are connected to…

  • LLM


  • LLM

    should read “clapping”

  • bdj

    Angelina Jolie almost turned down her latest film role because the subject – the kidnapping of a child and a woman’s betrayal – was too painful for her as a mother. But, as she tells Steve Pratt, she became fascinated by the story.

    BEING a mother, Angelina Jolie found her latest screen role – playing a woman whose nine-year-old son goes missing – one of the toughest of her career.

    Shooting the scene when she reports the child’s absence was the most difficult in the movie. “It’s such a serious fear, especially for any parent, that you just don’t want to physically do it,” she explains. “You don’t want to go up to a phone, pick it up and report a missing child. It’s horrible. So that was hard to do.”

    The latest addition to Jolie’s own ever-growing family, twins Knox and Vivienne, are upstairs – “hopefully asleep” – while their mother talks about the Clint Eastwood-directed movie, Changeling, downstairs at London’s Claridges hotel.

    She doesn’t say if her other half, actor Brad Pitt, is babysitting but, unlike other Hollywood A-listers, hasn’t sent advance word that personal questions will not be tolerated. If she thinks someone is overstepping the mark, she’s quite capable of dealing with it. How’s your health, someone asks, mentioning comments about how thin she looks in the movie.

    “I don’t think that’s a question,” she says calmly, putting the lid on further inquiries of that nature. But she’s happy to talk about the family that she and Pitt have. In addition to the twins, there are two-yearold Shiloh and three adoptive children, Maddox, Pax and Zahara.

    That’s unlikely to be the end of it. Can we expect to see her family expanding further? “I’m sure you can,”

    she smiles.

    ******Jolie has never been one to hide behind a publicist, perhaps being too honest for her own good. Interviews don’t only mention her work as a UN ambassador, but dredge up old quotes about her sex, drugs and rock’n’roll past. ***********

    She’s dressed in grey top and trousers with black boots. Her make-up is restrained and subtle, as befits the serious film about which she’s talking. Changeling is based on the true story of Christine Collins whose son went missing in 1928. Five months later the police returned a boy to her – that she knew wasn’t her son. The corrupt police department was hoping for good publicity by reuniting mother and son.

  • luvangie4ever

    I knew the NYT article was distorted to cast a bad light on Angie but all the same, I appreciate Larry Hackett for addressing the obvious slander.

  • mm

    I think most actors try to use their influence to get positive publicity. Angelina Jolie is just more manipulative than most.

  • LLM

    Angie should sue NYT and get some more millions to the charity.

    Thanks for all articles bdj.

  • Passing Through

    LOL! Good for Larry Hackett. This is shaping up into a People vs. New York Times pissing contest!

  • fan

    The New York Times has a cleverly timed piece up today by Brook Barnes which accuses Angelina Jolie of brokering a deal with People Magazine that would control how they cover her, Pitt and their family now and in the future:

    According to the deal offered by Ms. Jolie, the winning magazine was obliged to offer coverage that would not reflect negatively on her or her family, according to two people with knowledge of the bidding who were granted anonymity because the talks were confidential. The deal also asked for an “editorial plan” providing a road map of the layout, these people say.

    People denies it:

    Through a spokeswoman, People magazine, which is owned by Time Inc., released a statement denying that any conditions were placed on coverage. “These claims are categorically false,” the statement said. “Like any news organization, People does purchase photos, but the magazine does not determine editorial content based on the demands of outside parties.”

    The article continues to show Jolie manipulates the press in order to draw more attention to her charity work, which is admirable.

    The thing the NY Times neglects to mention, and what will probably never be talked about in the future when they talk about the stuff around A Mighty Heart is that the press at large, for the most part, focuses almost entirely on the silly and ongoing story of the love triangle. It never ends. Not only that but take a look at all of the tabloids on any given day — what kind of nonsense do they put on their covers day in and day out. But it isn’t just the tabs. The mainstream press are all over the story too. I finally figured out why: any news about Angelina but especially the private stuff draws big numbers across the board. When I do any post about Angelina the traffic spikes. Even on my level I notice it; I can’t imagine what the big magazines make off of her. They make money off of mostly fictional stories, sometimes complete lies, on a continual basis. That leads me to conclude that Jolie treats the press the way they deserve to be treated. This is not a woman who doesn’t respect the institution of journalism; this is a woman who is smart enough to see how it has devolved into a corporate-owned mess.

    She pissed off a lot of journalists during A Mighty Heart by attempting to filter how they interview her. She routinely, as do other celebrities, requests that no personal questions be asked and that if the questions are asked she won’t answer them. This frustrates her fans because all they want to know about is the personal stuff. Jolie wants people to see what she wants them to see. She has transformed herself from exhibitionist wild child to humanitarian and mother. She’s done a good job and it hasn’t been all press manipulation. Her past drags behind her like a piece of toilet paper and there isn’t much she can do about it. She is an icon, for better or worse, and to many she will always be the girl who stole Brad Pitt away from Jennifer Aniston or Billy Bob Thornton from Laura Dern.

    How does a negative article in the NY Times impact Jolie’s image, especially in terms of earning a “You Like Me” Oscar nomination? Maybe that depends on how the public views the victimized press. If people feel as I do that the mainstream has mostly let the readers down in its continual coverage of stuff that doesn’t really matter, well, maybe they won’t care that much that Jolie has no regard for journalism. But if there is a whiff of a “diva” in the air it may linger for a while.

  • fan

    1. Ryan Adams November 21st, 2008 at 9:35 am 1

    “But it isn’t just the tabs. The mainstream press are all over the story too. I finally figured out why: any news about Angelina but especially the private stuff draws big numbers across the board.”

    So true, Sasha. The New York Times puts this piece in their Business section, and with all the economic turmoil and financial meltdown in the news, it’s the 2nd most emailed “Business” story at the NYTimes today. They feature it above the virtual fold on the main page if the Times website. They open it to comments (73 responses, so far) — the only business article I can find on the site that’s given the open forum feedback treatment.

    That’s why the Times piece seems a little self-serving and disingenuous to me. “oh look! Press manipulator! Please read our story revealing how Angelina is all about the publicity!”

    It makes me respect her even more. The main stream media are vultures when it comes to certain people and sensationalist subjects. Anyone who can figure out how to effectively prevent themselves from being repeatedly victimized by the press earns my respect.

    In tangentially related news: Jennifer Aniston attempts to control her publicity too today, albeit on what seems to me a much more petty level:

    Jennifer Aniston Begs Fans Not To Sell Their Photos Of Her

    So Angelina tries to manage her image when even the NYTimes is gossiping about her on its business page. And she does it in a way to bring attention to charitable causes. While Jennifer Aniston bristles at somebody selling a cell-phone photo so “they can dine out on me.”

    Not that different on a basic privacy level, but who’s attempting to finesse the press with the most class? And who has the most noble motivation?

    So where’s the NYTimes Business article about Jeniffer Aniston whining about fan snapshots?

  • biggest manipulative

    She is one of the biggest manipulative media whores ever in this industry.

  • fan

    All Editors’ Selections » EDITORS’ SELECTIONS (what’s this?)
    November 21, 2008 9:10 am

    As a PR professional, I find Ms. Jolie more adept at messaging and consistent use of talking points than many who have been in our industry for years. Should she decide to leave the motion picture industry, she’d surely be in high demand as the head of her own agency. Other public figures would do well to study the way she has developed her philanthropy and image – she is a total professional.

    Marsha Keeffer

    — Marsha, Santa Cruz, CA

  • teamangelina77

    It’s interesting that the NYT chose to trash Angelina on its front page just a few days before featuring her rival Jennifer Aniston on the cover of their Sunday magazine. Smells funny to me.


    The sad thing is, The kids were born in July of ’08, all theother incidents referenced (July of ’06 Shi’s birth), (Angie’s Divorce and Adoption of Maddox (2002), a spread about Cambodian refugees (also 7 years ago?) — so what made the new nyt showbiz guy (based in LA, the clay Aiken lookalike) write this story NOW? At this juncture?

    The great news that Angelina has delivered – be it a critically acclaimed performance, 2 million to Iraqi children and US military children, the establishment of KIND (a nationwide network of lawyers set up to aid fleeing refugee minor children in dire circumstances), I could go on and on and on…about great things this guy could have written about – yet he decides to reach back as long as 8 years ago, and pull this out of his asss, making Angelina seem smarter than 99.999% of the rest of Hollywood in the process, while at the same time getting in his digs.

    The piece was all over the place. I couldn’t figure out if it was a slam, or if he’s telling the rest of HW to drop their high powered agents, or if he’s telling the rest of HW to keep their high powered agents because they’ll never be AS SMART as Angelina. LOLOL

    Whatever, he’s a wuss and a tool. Glad he’s getting smacked.

  • bdj

    Only hens would find someone that takes control of her life and image in Hollywierd a bad thing. Meanwhile, Whiny(X) is a pawn and big purse to her Super PR guy, CAA Agent, hair stylist, Plastic Surgeon, Doggy Therapist, boy toy, Echo as in no deals ProductionCompany, goddess Circle and spray on tan. Those the breaks.


    Angelina looks beautiful.

  • bdj

    This movie is by far one of the best movies of the year, and it would not surprise me to see this movie nominated for several Academy Awards. However, while this movie is very well done, it is also very disturbing, and leaves the audience with an uneasy feeling about the lives of Christine and Walter. What makes this movie even more disturbing is that it is based on a true story: exposing a side of our police force and people that society hoped never to see. I found myself becoming angry and upset with the circumstances of the movie, and while I do recommend this movie, I warn viewers that it is a very intense film that calls for the proper mindset.

    The acting in the movie was impeccable from major actors such as Angelina Jolie, Michael Kelly, John Malkovich and Jeffrey Donovan. The costumes, setting and props were very appropriate for the period and stylized for the 1920′s. I think everyone should see this movie. It opens eyes to ideas of corruption, redemption and the human character in general. It explores every type of human, from the normal and competent to the crazed and wild. It is probably the best movie in theatres now and one of the best we will see all year. Jolie gives the performance of a lifetime and is reminiscent at moments of her performance in Girl, Interrupted. If there is any movie to see right now, Changeling is it. I do not recommend this movie for younger audiences or for those who can not handle mature and disturbing events. However, for those who are looking for a thought-provoking and captivating film, Changeling fulfills every aspect.

  • Um…

    I agree #36!! Angelina is nothing but a media whore and if she really cared about ending the wold’s poverty, then she would give all of her money to the poor, quit acting, and free us from her ridiculous pseudoconcern for the fate of humanity. Why doesn’t she take some of the money she spends getting collagen stuffed into her lips and buy herself another 3rd world baby?


    They gave the 14 mil$ to CHARITY. duh.
    Angie has been a UNCHR ambassador for 8 yrs.

    NY Times is desperado & liars.


  • Flippo

    Seriously though EVERY celeb out there has some element of media manipulation (or at least attempts it). It’s part of the PR game & just like politicians, celebs want a certain image projected & go about doing certain things with the media in order to get that portrayed, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. I’ve no idea if the specifics of what the NY Times said are true but I’ve no doubt that elements of it are true, but then I suspect EVERY celeb does it so it’s no big deal.

    Just goes to show that you should never believe everything you read is 100% true regardless of which publication has written/said it or even if it has come straight out of the celeb’s mouth. It’s all a PR game.

  • whateverangie

    People please. Do you honestly think a leopard can change it’s stripes? You have a woman who is a homewrecker (Pitt was married when they starting dating). She admitted it. There are a lot of actors/actresses out there that don’t mention their charities and all they do for them. You have someone that is willing to put her kids in every magazine imaginable (even a breastfeeding picture) but YOU CAN NEVER ASK HER PERSONAL QUESTIONS!!!!!!. She is a media whore and it’s always on her terms. She always complains of privacy and she sells personal photos. If she didn’t want Jennifer to respond to her saying things, then she should SHUT HER MOUTH. She is an actress and you all are falling for her lines.

  • juju

    Um… @ 11/21/2008 at 6:10 pm

    :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Poor thing… Stop wasting you’re time obsessing and making up stories about Angelina and get HELP. You’re MENTALLY ILL.

  • bdj

    Um… @ 11/21/2008 at 6:10 pm
    She is waiting on you to do your part instead of whining about someone who has done more to help than a lot of self-absorbed, narcissistic Actors in Hollywood. Go tell Bono, Orpah, Whiny and a host of others to give all away. Angelina Jolie does what she can to bring awareness. It is not her fault, that she is making others look like slackers.

  • Um…

    #46, you have completely summed up the trainwreck, homewrecking, media attention Wh-o-r-e that is Angelina. She is so phony and she needs stop playing to the cameras already. She is playing the role of philanthropist mommy of the year and that is an act. She is an actress….WAKE UP PEOPLE and please take off the gullibility hats already!!

  • justJared fan

    I agree #36!! Angelina is nothing but a media ***** and if she really cared about ending the wold’s poverty, then she would give all of her money to the poor, quit acting, and free us from her ridiculous pseudoconcern for the fate of humanity. Why doesn’t she take some of the money she spends getting collagen stuffed into her lips and buy herself another 3rd world baby?
    Tell that to Oprah, Bono, or even Princess Diana when she was still alive. HYPOCRITE!

  • bdj

    whateverangie @ 11/21/2008 at 6:13 pm
    Geez hens, pull out Whiny and the homewrecker card. Poor Pathetic eternal victim Jen is always good for a case against AJ or two. Let’s hope the girl stays single and whiny, so that you guys can have something to whine about.