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.”

Like Just Jared on Facebook

JJ Links Around The Web

ABC

962 Responses to “People Magazine: NY Times is Bogus”

Pages: « 12 3 4 [5] 6 7 839 » Show All

  1. 101
    LLM Says:

    kim @ 11/21/2008 at 7:16 pm

    This is the real attention seeker. Enjoy

    http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=gjvSA7n0l3c&fmt=18

  2. 102
    African Girl Says:

    Bursted for what exactly??!

    The same thing Jennifer Lopez has 8 people doing for her?

    The same thing Jennifer aniston has Havuna doing for her?

    The same thing Gwnyth Paltrow, Jennifer Connelly, Madonna, Reese Witherspoon, even Paris freaking Hilton all have people doing for them?

    Are some people just too stupid to think?

  3. 103
    juju Says:

    kim @ 11/21/2008 at 7:16 pm
    _______________________________

    This is what Brad saw in Angelina:

    “But she also has the biggest heart and just inexhaustible spirit and sweetness and goodness,” he says. “She’s an inexhaustible mother and great grace and the real glue of the family.”

    This and her beauty, her intelligence, strength…

  4. 104
    LUCEABB Says:

    natascha—or whatever names you use— be careful, if the NYT wants to open this bag of worms they better be aware that all the bones may come tumbling out— trust, your girl jen has more to lose in this debate about media manipulation that angie does— EVERYBODY KNOWS AND HAVE KNOWN FOR YEARS THAT SHE AND HER PR ***** HAVE MADE DEALS WITH BOTH TABS AND SO CALLED LEGITMATE MEDIA FOR POSITIVE STORIES ABOUT HER,
    You and the other jenhens may want to rewrite history but there is plenty of evidence to prove otherwise.
    By-the way you think this non-story will hurt angie? are you that stupid? this will only make her more popular, she is after all the underdog with the big bad NYT making money off her for something that every celeb and their agents do, only difference is that angie does it better.

  5. 105
    bdj Says:

    Name calling has as much effective as whining, spamming and changing names over and over on a blog, NONE. It might make the person feel better, but does not change Angelina Jolie’s life. She still has the 6 adorable children, sexy and mighty fine partner and the striving career. Whiny X still has her hens, or not really a hen but really feel bad for ole pathetic one.

  6. 106
    ELLLLES Says:

    Just looked on E and saw pictures of A.Eckhart and fraudison and they have matching chins.

  7. 107
    LadyS Says:

    Yes, we’re all idiots, #106, and you’re a socially maladjusted teenage girl, sitting at home again on a Friday night, and stewing in your hormonal angst-ridden envy of someone who’s got SO much more going than you.

    Here’s a suggestion: do your English homework. Maybe this time you’ll finally get the hang of all that tricky punctuation.

  8. 108
    Andrómeda Says:

    That Ted is so stupid. And he considers himself a journalist?.

  9. 109
    bdj Says:

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/showbiz-and-lifestyle/news/2008/11/21/angelina-jolie-dedicates-role-to-mum-91466-22306965/
    Entire article at link
    Angelina Jolie dedicates role to mum
    Nov 21 2008 by Rob Driscoll, Western Mail

    Angelina Jolie is tipped for another Oscar for her new movie, in which she plays the mother of a missing child. She tells Rob Driscoll that it was one of her toughest challenges yet and reveals that she’s dedicating it to her own mother

    THE tears are welling up in Angelina Jolie’s eyes. That’s because Hollywood’s most talked-about star is discussing her mother, who died last year – and who surprisingly became the model for her latest big-screen role, in the Clint Eastwood-directed drama Changeling.

    “Her name was Marcheline, but we called her Marshmallow as a joke, because she was just the softest, most gentle woman in the world,” recalls Jolie, who at this point battles to stop herself from crying outright.

    “She was really, really sweet and she would never get angry. She couldn’t swear to save her life. But when it came to her kids, she was really fierce and so this (film) is very much her, and her story, in that she was the woman I related to, who had that elegance and strength through just knowing what was right.”

    A heart-tugging period drama based on real events, Changeling sees Jolie take on the role of Christine Collins, a California telephone-company supervisor and single mother whose nine-year-old son went missing in 1928. When the police announce that the boy has been found, and present Collins with a child she doesn’t recognise, the stage is set for a startling confrontation between a bewildered yet determined woman and a corrupt Los Angeles police department that has its own sinister reasons for wanting to silence Collins and close the kidnapping case.

    Jolie’s extraordinary performance in the film is already being rightly tipped for a Best Actress Oscar nomination, yet as a mother herself – she and partner Brad Pitt have six children, three of them adopted – the 33-year-old actress must have found making the movie an incredibly harrowing and emotionally demanding experience.

    “It was very hard,” says Jolie, who became pregnant with her twins during the shooting of the film. “When I first read the script I couldn’t put it down, but then I said ‘No’ immediately. I didn’t want to go into this project because it was too upsetting, and I didn’t want to do a film about a child being kidnapped. But then afterwards I couldn’t stop talking about this person, Christine Collins.

  10. 110
    mimi Says:

    the whor e @ 11/21/2008 at 7:07 pm

    Since you called yourself a ***** that is exactly what you are. Now you insignificant ***** with HIV why don’t you run along to the biggest ***** in Hw and kiss that chin chin face of hers.

  11. 111
    bdj Says:

    http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117996322.html?categoryId=1278&cs=1

    ‘Burn After Reading’ on fire overseas
    Comedy grossed $2.5 mil from 1,367 playdates
    By PAMELA MCCLINTOCK, ARCHIE THOMASMore Articles:

    While James Bond continues to dominate the international box office, the Coen brothers are also reaping some solace from the solid overseas perf of “Burn After Reading.”
    Pic is showing long legs with $67.5 million to date in foreign territories.

    Dark comedy is now nearing the international performance for the Coens’ previous outing, “No Country for Old Men.” Over the Nov. 14-16 weekend, “Burn” grossed $2.5 million from 1,367 playdates in its ninth week in release.

    Toplining Brad Pitt, George Clooney and Tilda Swinton, pic has seen its biggest biz in the U.K. with $11.9 million.

    The U.K. is one of a handful of hotspots for Coen fare; the others are Spain, Germany, France and Australia.

    Moody Western “No Country” cumed $86.7 million at the international box office and $74.3 million domestically for a worldwide total of $161 million.

    “Burn After Reading’s” worldwide total to date is $127.4 million. Pic has yet to open in France.

    Italian auds and critics agreed over Clint Eastwood’s Angelina Jolie starrer “Changeling,” which grossed $1.6 million from 299 runs for a respectable $5,402 per-location average.

    “Changeling” got off to a slow start in France — where Eastwood is something of a national hero — but made up for it. In its first five days, pic earned $2.8 million from 417.

  12. 112
    juju Says:

    the whor e @ 11/21/2008 at 7:19 pm
    _________________________

    All actors have a group of sicks that hate them for no reason or people that turn their frustrations and problems to them.

    The group of people that hates Angelina for no reason is constitued mainly of a bunch of crazy, envy, jealous, hateful, narrow-minded women that are fans of Jennifer Aniston. Like YOU.

    That’s why i keep telling you that instead of wasting you’re time with someone you don’t like, you should use that time to find a good therapist to work through you’re issues.

  13. 113
    NEW YORK TIMESCRAP Says:

    New York Times prints crap just to sell.

  14. 114
    bdj Says:

    http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117996322.html?categoryId=1278&cs=1

    Pic is showing long legs with $67.5 million to date in foreign territories.

    ‘Burn After Reading’ on fire overseas

    While James Bond continues to dominate the international box office, the Coen brothers are also reaping some solace from the solid overseas perf of “Burn After Reading.”

    Dark comedy is now nearing the international performance for the Coens’ previous outing, “No Country for Old Men.” Over the Nov. 14-16 weekend, “Burn” grossed $2.5 million from 1,367 playdates in its ninth week in release.

    Toplining Brad Pitt, George Clooney and Tilda Swinton, pic has seen its biggest biz in the U.K. with $11.9 million.

    The U.K. is one of a handful of hotspots for Coen fare; the others are Spain, Germany, France and Australia.

    Moody Western “No Country” cumed $86.7 million at the international box office and $74.3 million domestically for a worldwide total of $161 million.

    “Burn After Reading’s” worldwide total to date is $127.4 million. Pic has yet to open in France.

    Italian auds and critics agreed over Clint Eastwood’s Angelina Jolie starrer “Changeling,” which grossed $1.6 million from 299 runs for a respectable $5,402 per-location average.

    “Changeling” got off to a slow start in France — where Eastwood is something of a national hero — but made up for it. In its first five days, pic earned $2.8 million from 417.

  15. 115
    JM Says:

    you mean the golden shower couple,lol

  16. 116
    mm Says:

    Angelina is not getting as many favorable comments as usual. Is it possible that all the 12 year olds who are fanatically devoted to her are now posting on Jared Jr?

  17. 117
    JealousHAGS Says:

    All these jealous hags who say they hate Angelina spends a lot of time reading about her. They are so green with envy and hate, it’s consuming them. Trolls, admit it you are so obsessed with the Jolie-Pitts.

  18. 118
    From Lainey Says:

    The real Brange

    Am about to have a very smug moment. If you can’t stand it, click away quickly.

    Wasn’t intending on writing about the New York Times piece titled “Angelina Jolie’s Carefully Orchestrated Image” because, well, why is this news? But I keep getting the emails so…

    Go through the archives of this blog and you will find that message repeated repeatedly: when it comes to the Pitts, they are the masters of the game. Always in control. Always strategising. Always maneuvering. Always selling. And a lot of people are always buying.

    The publication says Jolie has no publicist, cites specific instances where the Brange dictated editorial terms to People Magazine and Hello and also refers to a time way back just after her split with BBT when she orchestrated a photo shoot with Maddox that began her transformation from oversexed wild crazy girl to humanitarian Earth Mother. Yes, she’s militant about her public image. Yes, HE is militant about his public image. Yes they are running the show. Yes they throw their weight around and many members of the press wither at their demands. Yes People Magazine is half way up their asses.

    Again…why is this news?

    As I’ve said time and again, the Pitts are never photographed unless they WANT to be photographed.

    Getting it validated by the New York Times though is pretty amazing. And the New York Times giving the Brange a backhanded compliment is pretty amazing too. Brangelunatics don’t like the New York Times anymore.

    Having said that, the article describes the Brange machinations almost as if they are rogue moves, as if they operate by a completely different set of standards from everyone else.

    Please.

    It’s the same playbook. They just execute it better than the rest.

    Shelf Ass Jessica Biel executes it pretty well too. And last week Jennifer Aniston did a kick ass job as well, redeeming herself from Huvane’s previous blunders.

    As such, an even BETTER article would have been to call out all the media manipulators and rank them according to proficiency supported by Q scores, graphs and pie charts, magazine mentions, message board activity, and paparazzi interest with the Brange sitting way at the top and, say, someone like Mischa Barton ranking closer to the bottom.

    Let’s call it The Famewhore Games.

    Then would the MiniVan Majority believe that all celebrities are full of sh-t?

  19. 119
    juju Says:

    the whor e @ 11/21/2008 at 7:25 pm
    ________________________________

    :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Yes, Angelina beats the crap out of Brad every night and he obvious love it.

  20. 120
    juju Says:

    the whor e @ 11/21/2008 at 7:33 pm
    __________________________________

    Sorry, poor thing, but i don’t have idols.
    But i do like and admire Angelina.

  21. 121
    JM Says:

    i love when the troll agrees with it self-so entertaining,lol

  22. 122
    LUCEABB Says:

    Poor troll— are you mad because all the work you, jen and her hens and PR have done over the last two weeks have been in vein? your efforts did’nt work? Angie still #1 Brad still love her, she is loved by her kids and the Pitt family and most important and what seem to drive you crazy is that she still has millions of fans who will continue to defend her ALWAYS

  23. 123
    Well Says:

    Oh well whatever the Q score is says she’s liked by many so you don’t matter… OBVIOUSLY.

  24. 124
    juju Says:

    the whor e @ 11/21/2008 at 7:37 pm
    _____________________________________

    Anyone what to try to gess what’s her next name will be? :lol: :lol:

  25. 125
    old lady Says:

    I believe in Angelina and I’m glad that People did the right thing by defending their values and therefore defending her. I agree with other fans’ suggestion to “put the spotlight” on this Barns person and see what’s his/her agenda. Sounds like a phony name to me. I don’t read the NYT but sounds like it’s desperate for some attention.

Pages: « 12 3 4 [5] 6 7 839 » Show All

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here