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

Getty
  • See the best reactions to Kanye West's raunchy "Fade" video - US Weekly
  • Get more details on the death of Juan Gabriel - TMZ
  • Find out what happened on KUWTK - Gossip Cop
  • Kristen Stewart and her girlfriend step out together - Just Jared Jr
  • Best & worst dressed at the VMAs - Radar
  • Have you seen Pete's Dragon yet? - Lainey Gossip
  • Here's what Renee Zellweger had to say about her iconic role - The Hollywood Reporter
  • yuck

    I love Angie!

  • Can someone tell me please

    :) @ 11/22/2008 at 12:04 am Can someone tell me please @ 11/21/2008 at 11:30 pm

    Where is this picture from (the one Jared has up)????

    Is it from a recent interview? If so, can someone post the link to the interview please?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cw4xv_14VM
    __________________________________________

    Thanks a bunch, you rock. :-)

  • Sammy

    Angelina’s fans are the ones that keep bringing Brad’s ex
    wife into the picture. I hardly think she has anything to do
    with this. I know you all think that Angelina is wonderful,
    People must know that everyone that worships her go
    to Just Jared’s sight. Otherwise they would have denied
    this in their own magazine. I think it is rather sad that
    it doesn’t bother anyone that she doesn’t tell the truth,
    change her stories every other day, worships her kids
    but isn,t above pimping them out for money, says she
    is going to stay home one week and the next says
    she isn’t. One of the charties that she has worked with
    is being investigated and the person owes back taxes.
    Charities are great but they should be held accountable
    for what they are doing with their money. I can’t believe
    that the New York Times doesn’t have their story right
    or they wouldn’t have printed it. Are you all so star stuck
    that you donate to a cause and don’t even want to know
    if it is being used for what you are told. I for one want
    to see what they gave in 2007. Anybody can put their
    money in a foundation to save money on their taxes
    and pledge money but when and how is it going to
    given out. I had read a article about charties that
    were going to investigated last week in another
    article. With all the charties in America that are
    so desperate it really shouldn’t be hard to find
    one to help.

  • CLINIQUA

    oh look, first she’s sandy, then mary now she’s marica — look you f**king moron, give it up, you’re gonna keep getting flipped because whatever 1996 pc you are pounding your silly asss diatribes out on, all read the same way – f*cked up with abbreviated sentences.

    Face it, you’re obsessed with Jolie like everybody else – if anything you should identify with how Brad felt when he met her. Because like him, you can’t climb off her for a second.

    Go show maniston and her i’m an illiterate monkey menopausal greek lady Aniston who wants to be the new katherin heigl but have none of the talent. She needs love. The golden showers from perez hilton’s lover aren’t doing her self-esteem any good.

  • Jill

    Guys, Jared posted a link on the X thread to the NY Times article. It’s a riot. They asked the the dumbest-ass questions I ever heard. Just a sampling:

    Q: What was the first television show you remember watching?
    A: Oh, God — “The New Zoo Revue”? Or maybe “Land of the Lost?” No — it was that guy . . . Captain Kangaroo. He was on the porch with Mr. Green Jeans. Have I just dated myself?

    Q: When did you first appear on a screen?
    A: My dad became a soap opera actor, and I was an extra in a skating rink scene on the soap. I didn’t audition. It was nepotism all the way.

    Q: If “Friends” comes on when you’re home, will you watch?
    A: I have. There are times I don’t even remember that particular show. This is horrible to say, but there are times when I laugh my rear end off. And I get in debates with people who are over and say, “ ‘Friends’ is not my thing.” Excuse you!

    Q: You’re lucky that the show that was successful — “Friends” — was the one that should have been. You could have been Jeanie Bueller forever.
    A: That would have been the worst… That’s why “Friends” was so great. During the first week of shooting, I thought, I’ll be heartbroken if this doesn’t continue. It was the first time I felt like part of the cool kids.

  • bdj

    Research is your friend Marcia/Sandy/Mary/jane/Sue/Jen. Look up charitable foundations and read about the Jolie-Pitt various charitable organizations. To start with makeitrightnola.org and unhcr.org and the others that were listed on this thread. You can repeat the same thing under different names all night long but critics with greater resources than your mindless rant have investigated the Jolie-Pitts and come to the conclusion that they are the real deal.

  • ebmo

    If anyone else is up EST. zone.
    showbiz tonight is doing something on Angie right now!

  • CLINIQUA

    Omg jill, she sounds 14, except I won’t even insult 14 yr olds like that – they are deeper and more profound than this 40 yr old bish….how scary. …yeah sure, they did ask dumb questions, but she gave the worst answers…I think they thought she might be able to be funny, ala comedy improv people, they should know what we all do – that she ain’t that kind of comic actress, she’s the lucky actress that gets to share screentime with others who are somewhat funny…and uh, yeah bish, you just dated yourself, my grandma used to watch Captain Kangaroo. LMAO Dear God, new zoo revue (hunh?) cool kids, ‘friends is not my thing – Excuse you!’ Seriously, Dakota Fanning’s interviews are 1000 times more grown up and interesting – and nyt is throwing Angie to the wolves and lauding this bish?? Help us all.

  • an oldie

    Worth repeating, and thank you for posting.

    # 156 awards @ 11/21/2008 at 8:17 pm Chris Good
    November 21st, 2008 at 5:56 pm 23

    Ignorance is not only bliss, haters count on it.

    So, we are back to that old argument again – what came first? People’s interest in ‘Brangelina,’ or the pictorial of their firstborn? Since I’m a photographer, and know that people were offering me and my brethren a million dollars cash back in the spring of 2005 for a picture of Brad & Angelina together, a full YEAR before Shiloh was a twinkle – I would say the pictorial is a result of the rabid full-on chase we were exacting on the family.

    Have people forgotten the exodus of every major media outlet and pap agency to Lake Como, Italy in 2006 because they thought a wedding was taking place? Or how about the CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC, CBS stories and crawls about a New Orleans wedding less than 8 months ago?

    So again, I’m sorry — if I’m Angelina Jolie what are my choices again?

    1) I can be chased down in the street for the elusive first photographs of my child which will endanger my family and fatten the photographer and that of American Media Inc (tabloid behomoth) OR…

    2) I can arrange a pictorial in a benign reputable weekly like People, get paid 14 million and distribute it to people around the world in need – it may even actually SAVE LIVES.

    Hmmmm…decisions, decisions. Well, since I have a BRAIN. I’m going the Angelina Saves Lives route.

    Let’s examine the Halle Berry route. Halle decides not to publish any pictorials, stating her daughter will “not be a public figure.” The papz laugh in her face. Halle’s home and property get invaded by papz trying to take pics of her infant daughter. Halle then decides to give them what they want and go to the zoo and the park and let the papz have at. Well, the next week, the pictures come out and the tabloid papz and tabloid publishing companies make their millions on the backs of her and her child.

    I saw the many pics & stories about baby Nalah in People, US, STAR and the Bauer Publications – they ran them a good month. What does Halle get in return? well…NOTHING.

    Not even a promise to not do it again, because OF COURSE, the papz will be out tomorrow and the next day and the next – annoying Halle and her child once again.

    You can kind of view it like this:

    Halle = O

    American Media Inc & Bauer Publishing (In Touch, Life & Style) STAR, Natnl Enquirer, US Magazine, People magazine = 20-30 MILLION

    Via Angelina Jolie & the Jolie Pitt Foundation: Drs Without Borders, US Military Children’s Foundation, UNHCR, AIDS & Malaria Foundations in SE Asia and Ethiopia, Millenium Project, KIND (Nationwide Network of Lawyers Assisting Minor Refugee Children) = 10 MILLION

    Oh, and the PR Agencies/Agents that take 15% of whatever Angelina Jolie makes = ZERO. Because Angelina has NO agent, NO CAA, NO ICM, NO PK. Just her. That’s 15% back in her pocket, or rather to whatever charitable noble foundation she desires to give it to.

    Yes, and now you see why you’re getting these strategically timed and placed articles – it’s very clear why Angelina Jolie must be punished.

    Wonder when someone will write a story about THAT?? I say no time soon, because most of the entertainment reporters writing for so-called reputable outlets get greased by the PR agents. KNOWN FACT. And another reason for this piece most likely, it’s all about competition – you heard Tilda Swinton last year. She knows what’s up.

    Good for People Mag for standing up. They know where all the bodies are buried. I’m sure the People editor was fit to be tied, here he gets raked over the coals for publishing a 6 year old story about Angelina’s Cambodian son, and the orphanage he was in, and the poverty in that country….

    …and he knows just last WEEK he’s taking calls from CAA & PR power mogul Huvane asking him to publish Jen & John at the Sunset Towers, and to please write how loving they seemed. Or worse yet, he’s being asked to run a piece on how Jen’s 4th nose job isn’t really cosmetic, it’s all about her deviated septum.

    Yet he takes it in the gut, for publishing skyrocketing HIV infection rates in Ethiopia, along with Angelina’s pictures of her daughter Zahara?

    Wake up Hollywood. Though you may claim, this page is turning into Perez Hilton, most people would say, that happened a long time ago. It’s true, very seldom do you get an Oscar winning actress who is topping both the tabloids as well as the critically acclaimed list. The last person may have been Julia Roberts, but when she was peaking, the media wasn’t as incestuous as it is now. You didn’t have papers of note, quoting tabloid editors known for their lies. You can choose to view Jolie and her level of fame as an anamoly and something you don’t need to deal with – but the same problems will exist whether you discuss her or not — and that is, at the end of the day, what truly makes this a story to pay attention to, is that she, one of the biggest stars in the world, is NOT OWNED by the Death Star.

    She’s powerful, all by her little self. In my book, that’s a reason to be admired, not exposed or cut down.

    Hence why she’s on page 1 of the NYT. “Scary Smart,” indeed.

    Report

  • ebmo

    # 300 Marica @ 11/22/2008 at 2:03 am
    +++++++++++++++++++++
    Marcia, Marcia, Marcia

    (I couldn’t help myself)

  • http://justjared dina #1

    I know I said the other night that I was not going to watch Showbiz Tonight again after their jumping on the whole uncool incident. Well tonight I turned on the tv in the kitchen and it just happened to be on the channel where Showbiz comes on.

    Before my finger could press the button to surf on they mentioned they were going to do this segment on The Transfomation of Angelina Jolie. My first inclination was to move on because they have suckered me to watch them in the past only to regret it afterwards.

    I decided to watch it. And i must say I am happy I did. It was one of the most positive tellings about Angie done by an entertainment. Naturally the started with the triad. I love that name for the kiss, the blood, and sex. But was brief and not salacious.

    I immediately went into her adopting of Maddox, divorce from BBT. It traced how she traveled around the world to some of the most dangerous hot spots in the world. And how she had been doing this without practically no one knowing about it and by herself. The showed the places she had traveled to.

    This was all done with admiration and respect. They talked about her meeting Brad during the fliming of MMS. No mention of x. How once they came together she adopted Z and how Brad in turn gave both Z and Maddox his name.

    They talked about Shiloh. And how the two of them were redefining themselves through their humanitarian work. Brad with makeitright, and Angie with her involvement in the UN and other causes.

    I don’t remember the lady that narrating the piece but she said it was easy to see how Angie could go from wild child to humanitarian. She redirected her energy from something negative to something positive.
    It was really good.

    What was also interested is that they have these nightly questions. The question to night was should x and Angie end their feuding or something like that, should x move on? Any rate 63% said x should move on. 63% said move on x. 37% said she shouldn’t.

    They also had people who called in. One lady said that Angie hadn’t started the feud and it wasn’t on her. I am paraphrasing here. Another lady called in and said that she respecected Angie for her humanitarian work, but she was a some stupid name.

    Except for that one person the segment was totally positive. And 63% said they are tired of x and her whinning and she should move on. If you can catch it it’s worth a watching. People have real problems to deal with. To listen to some less than talented, homely millionaire cry about a four year marriage she frucked up has gotten more than old. It is now putrid. Peace

  • CLINIQUA

    lmao ebmo.

  • LLM

    ebmo @ 11/22/2008 at 2:15 am

    I am at EST, i watched it at 11pm, now 2pm it is the 2nd time, I think it is old. But they have a poll about it’s time for X and Angie to burry the hatch (something like that- I forgot)
    60+% say yes
    30+% say no
    I think the public begin to get tired of the triangle.

  • LIANE

    Good for AJ if she can really do what NYT is saying. Many celebrities employed PR co and pay millions to them to generate positive press. If AJ without PR rep can do it, she is one astute and great businesswoman. PR agency could do with personnel like her. She know how to use her assets without paying obscene amt for the publicity. All the others shd learn from her.
    She can be a subject/ topic of discussion/dissertation in University Mktg & advertising course esp in marketing of celebritities. ” How to manipulate the press for positive press and still generate millions?
    WOW. If I ever do my MBA maybe I will do this for my thesis and then start a PR company, employed AJ as one of the advisor.
    In the world of show biz, it is the best manipulator of the press who is the winner. So whatever is said, AJ is the winner if what NYT said is true.

  • neer

    I want to share the following quotes (of various personalities) to the people who are cynical about Angie’s motive in doing her share in helping others:

    “What she has done transcends her physical beauty and really reminds us that it’s what is in the heart, and I really want to commend her for what she’s done in such a serious and thoughtful way.” (Hillary Clinton)

    “I don’t know Angelina Jolie, but I admire her work.” (Barack Obama)

    “Celebrities are doing the work that journalists are not. We can’t afford to be cynical about that….Can you really strike out against Angie and Bono?…Sure, there’s an opinion backlash. People think they are doing it for some sort of ego trip. But the people who are expressing that opinion? What are they doing?” (Marianne Pearl)

    “Angie roughs it. She lives with us in the forest and eats the crickets and the cockroaches the locals eat without thinking twice about it. Whenever I read in magazines about her ‘glorious house in Cambodia,’ I think, What? It’s a shack. I don’t think people believe she has the ability to abandon everything in the West and transpose herself to a situation with malaria and dengue fever and the most extreme poverty. I read about her ‘Hollywood life.’ Well, you can’t live a Hollywood life in this part of Cambodia.” (Stephen Bognar)

    “Their participation has been absolutely essential to the mainstreaming of these global issues into American life, which is why I find so ridiculous the cynicism, the pundits who disdain this. They misunderstand how our society works, and they misjudge these people, their leadership. No good deed goes unpunished, and it’s certainly true of this activity. Angelina goes at it with utter honesty, hard work and a deep feeling for the common faith of humanity. There’s no doubt about that or about her love for her children. And yet the amount of chattering that goes on about it is endless and preposterous, in my view” (Jeffrey Sachs)

    “OK.Now, your daughter, Angelina Jolie. You know, we checked her out. I don’t know whether you know this or not. Big investigation on her. And we found out she walks the walk, that she gives all the money, millions of dollars and this and that. (Bill O’Reilly talking to Jon Voight)

    “What I don’t understand is the media’s criticism (of Jolie’s) involvement in humanitarian aide and why they question her motives and sincerity..It’s like, Who cares? She’s doing a good job and putting so much of her time and money in the causes.” (Tea Leoni)

    “These people don’t need additional focus or respect. I’m not that cynical at all. Angelina has given not only her time, but her money to assist people who need it most….In the past, entertainers have usually led selfish and egotistical lives so I like it when I see people like Angelina trying so hard. I think she has raised some awareness and that she has an extremely good heart.” (Mia Farrow)

    “Her going to Haiti really helped my foundation. It was in a time where she was still pregnant. Haiti being the most dangerous place in the world, for Angelina Jolie to land there—while pregnant—that’s gangster. We respect that to the T.“ (Wyclef Jean)

    “I like them (Angelina & Brad) very much…They’re bright, interested in what’s going on, open to everything, ready to grab everything they can out of life. They’re not wasting a lot of time being movie stars. They’re taking advantage of it to see, listen and learn. “(Leslie Caron)

    “I want to congratulate Angelina because it’s been a very long time since I’ve been in this business and I’ve never met a person who has such a good balance between family life, humanitarian efforts, ..and all the extraordinary work that she does in addition to this.” (Dustin Hoffman)

    “I think her humanitarian position has just changed the way actresses and people in the industry think about what they can actually do … to help the world,” (Marc Bauer)

    “Angelina Jolie…just seeing an actress who has been through it all and who doesn’t care what other people say about her — someone who has forged her own path.” (Olivia Wilde)

  • an oldie

    Thank you for posting the following article. Like PT, I agree 110% with the writer, Chris Good. Is there a link?

    # 156 awards @ 11/21/2008 at 8:17 pm Chris Good
    November 21st, 2008 at 5:56 pm 23

    Ignorance is not only bliss, haters count on it.

    So, we are back to that old argument again – what came first? People’s interest in ‘Brangelina,’ or the pictorial of their firstborn? Since I’m a photographer, and know that people were offering me and my brethren a million dollars cash back in the spring of 2005 for a picture of Brad & Angelina together, a full YEAR before Shiloh was a twinkle – I would say the pictorial is a result of the rabid full-on chase we were exacting on the family.

    Have people forgotten the exodus of every major media outlet and pap agency to Lake Como, Italy in 2006 because they thought a wedding was taking place? Or how about the CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC, CBS stories and crawls about a New Orleans wedding less than 8 months ago?

    So again, I’m sorry — if I’m Angelina Jolie what are my choices again?

    1) I can be chased down in the street for the elusive first photographs of my child which will endanger my family and fatten the photographer and that of American Media Inc (tabloid behomoth) OR…

    2) I can arrange a pictorial in a benign reputable weekly like People, get paid 14 million and distribute it to people around the world in need – it may even actually SAVE LIVES.

    Hmmmm…decisions, decisions. Well, since I have a BRAIN. I’m going the Angelina Saves Lives route.

    Let’s examine the Halle Berry route. Halle decides not to publish any pictorials, stating her daughter will “not be a public figure.” The papz laugh in her face. Halle’s home and property get invaded by papz trying to take pics of her infant daughter. Halle then decides to give them what they want and go to the zoo and the park and let the papz have at. Well, the next week, the pictures come out and the tabloid papz and tabloid publishing companies make their millions on the backs of her and her child.

    I saw the many pics & stories about baby Nalah in People, US, STAR and the Bauer Publications – they ran them a good month. What does Halle get in return? well…NOTHING.

    Not even a promise to not do it again, because OF COURSE, the papz will be out tomorrow and the next day and the next – annoying Halle and her child once again.

    You can kind of view it like this:

    Halle = O

    American Media Inc & Bauer Publishing (In Touch, Life & Style) STAR, Natnl Enquirer, US Magazine, People magazine = 20-30 MILLION

    Via Angelina Jolie & the Jolie Pitt Foundation: Drs Without Borders, US Military Children’s Foundation, UNHCR, AIDS & Malaria Foundations in SE Asia and Ethiopia, Millenium Project, KIND (Nationwide Network of Lawyers Assisting Minor Refugee Children) = 10 MILLION

    Oh, and the PR Agencies/Agents that take 15% of whatever Angelina Jolie makes = ZERO. Because Angelina has NO agent, NO CAA, NO ICM, NO PK. Just her. That’s 15% back in her pocket, or rather to whatever charitable noble foundation she desires to give it to.

    Yes, and now you see why you’re getting these strategically timed and placed articles – it’s very clear why Angelina Jolie must be punished.

    Wonder when someone will write a story about THAT?? I say no time soon, because most of the entertainment reporters writing for so-called reputable outlets get greased by the PR agents. KNOWN FACT. And another reason for this piece most likely, it’s all about competition – you heard Tilda Swinton last year. She knows what’s up.

    Good for People Mag for standing up. They know where all the bodies are buried. I’m sure the People editor was fit to be tied, here he gets raked over the coals for publishing a 6 year old story about Angelina’s Cambodian son, and the orphanage he was in, and the poverty in that country….

    …and he knows just last WEEK he’s taking calls from CAA & PR power mogul Huvane asking him to publish Jen & John at the Sunset Towers, and to please write how loving they seemed. Or worse yet, he’s being asked to run a piece on how Jen’s 4th nose job isn’t really cosmetic, it’s all about her deviated septum.

    Yet he takes it in the gut, for publishing skyrocketing HIV infection rates in Ethiopia, along with Angelina’s pictures of her daughter Zahara?

    Wake up Hollywood. Though you may claim, this page is turning into Perez Hilton, most people would say, that happened a long time ago. It’s true, very seldom do you get an Oscar winning actress who is topping both the tabloids as well as the critically acclaimed list. The last person may have been Julia Roberts, but when she was peaking, the media wasn’t as incestuous as it is now. You didn’t have papers of note, quoting tabloid editors known for their lies. You can choose to view Jolie and her level of fame as an anamoly and something you don’t need to deal with – but the same problems will exist whether you discuss her or not —

  • releka

    Showbiz toight is a joke. Are they going to do the Angelina transformation every three months? Wow the power of Angelina is amazing.

  • CLINIQUA

    Thanks for those quotes neer — I am bookmarking and posting wherever I can, if you don’t mind. Thanks.

  • JM

    maniston is really a piece of non-existent trash dna by the way she answered those questions,lol,put a fork in the bit ch, her career is smoked,lol

  • go sox

    awww…..I see all the ‘trolls” are having fits about ANYTHING negative about their saint, as usual. You people are pathetic. LMAO!!!!

  • JM

    oh another name changing maniston freak is here to expound us with is 1st grade philosphy,lol,troll,rather have a saint than a coked up tv star getting piss on by another coked up musican honey,lol

  • http://justjared dina #1

    # 314 releka I just posted a comment about Showbiz Tonight and their segment on Angie and Jared has put it in moderation. There is nothing negative in it.

    I had sworn off ST after their uncool rant. But tonight I saw that headline and decided to watch. I thought it was pretty positive how it traced her early years of humanitarian work show ing the countries she visited withou fanfare to her efforts now.

    They included everything her meeting Brad, adopting z, having Shiloh, Pax, makeitright everything except x. Goodgawd.

    I was impressed. Therefore I am surprised that I am in moderation. Ohwell who knows why. IMHO is was worth watching. Nothing a fan wouldn’t know but it is good to see something positive. Peace

  • mmsic

    People,if you read and understand what is being said,it says no one is exempted from media manipulation for positive image publicity,not even Brad and Angie,except the Brangies do it better, with grace because they do it not only for their image but to put awareness on their humanitarian endeavors.With regards to Jennifer Aniston,why do you think Alec Baldwin changed his feelings in less than 24 hrs.when asked by the media “how does it feel kissing Jennifer Aniston?”It is because of her PR TEAM.Bottom line is Brad and Angie outsmarted the fox(media),so now they are crying foul!!!And GOD is still on Brad and Angie’s side,period.

  • LLM

    dina #1 @ 11/22/2008 at 2:41 am

    How come you always got moderated :lol:

    btw, I was watching Brad on Okra again with my mouth ear to ear.

  • an oldie

    Does anybody know what website the Chris Good article is from? He remembers a lot of the details about Brad and Angelina that I have forgotten. He is good (no pun intended).

  • BrooksBarnesEXPOSED

    Interesting…from awards….

    Mary B.
    November 22nd, 2008 at 12:51 am

    The posts supporting and/or defending Angelina Jolie here are simply a direct result of ridiculous attacks on her. No sane person likes unfair attacks on others. I love how we are supposed to be in a cult of Angelina lovers. I’d say that just the opposite seems to exist because I keep reading the same bizarre words and accusations against her in a lot of places on the net. That cannot be a coincidence.

    There are a few certified Jolie attackers here who don’t make a whit of sense babbling on about her as if she is the devil incarnate. Has this site attracted some fundamentalist cult?

    As for the NY Times piece, I also cannot believe the criticisms in it over essentially nothing. The article is pretty much a lot of hot air. It offfers up more speculation and extrapolation than it does facts. What in the world is it “exposing”?

    It has become quite the thing to attack strong women who take control of their lives and try to do some good in the world. That seems to be all I am doing this year – defending strong women who attract ridiculously over the top criticism. I am all for more female power.

    Is someone here really attacking the Jolie Pitt Foundation? Please. Its tax filings are online for all to see as have been the tax forms for Jolie’s other foundation. The JP Foundation makes very generous donations to many causes I also believe in. I don’t see how anyone can criticize their generosity with a straight face. No foundation distributes all its money or it would cease to exist. Do people really not understand this basic concept?

    For the record, the NY Times piece was written by the same “reporter” who did such a terrible job reporting on the WGA strike last year. Brooks Barnes earned a reputation as a hack when he pretty much bought everything the studio moguls, publicists and production companies sold him – also anonymously – and was handed his ass by the writers out there. Take a whiff of him at Nikki Finke’s site – a number of reporters and bloggers completely deconstruct his articles during the strike.

    Little Brooks Barnes is also a wannabe screenwriter.
    _____________

  • http://justjared dina #1

    LLM I just wrote a comment stating the samething and I am in moderation. What is with this in moderation thing?

    63% said the should bury the hatchet, and x should move on. Did you hear the woman who said that Angie hadn’t started the feud? People are tired of x and her pity parties

    One lady said she respected Angie’s humanitarian work but she was some name she called her. I think x’s Vogue article didn’t help her. And Brad on Oprah was the final nail in the coffin.

    People have real issues to deal with no some rich woman who refuses to get a life and move on. I am going to be like Neleh and say hey Jared don’t put this in moderation please. Peace

  • +++

    an oldie @ 11/22/2008 at 2:18 am

    Worth repeating, and thank you for posting.

    # 156 awards @ 11/21/2008 at 8:17 pm Chris Good

    GREAT POST. !!!!!!!!!!! BRAVO !!!!!!!!!

  • Warning
  • http://justjared dina #1

    I posted my original comments at JJB. I am going to try and post them here again. I don’t know why I am in moderation. Jared that sucks.

    I know I said the other night that I was not going to watch Showbiz Tonight again after their jumping on the whole uncool incident. Well tonight I turned on the tv in the kitchen and it just happened to be on the channel where Showbiz comes on.
    Before my finger could press the button to surf on they mentioned they were going to do this segment on The Transfomation of Angelina Jolie. My first inclination was to move on because they have suckered me to watch them in the past only to regret it afterwards.
    I decided to watch it. And i must say I am happy I did. It was one of the most positive tellings about Angie done by an entertainment. Naturally the started with the triad. I love that name for the kiss, the blood, and sex. But was brief and not salacious.
    I immediately went into her adopting of Maddox, divorce from BBT. It traced how she traveled around the world to some of the most dangerous hot spots in the world. And how she had been doing this without practically no one knowing about it and by herself. The showed the places she had traveled to.
    This was all done with admiration and respect. They talked about her meeting Brad during the fliming of MMS. No mention of x. How once they came together she adopted Z and how Brad in turn gave both Z and Maddox his name.
    They talked about Shiloh. And how the two of them were redefining themselves through their humanitarian work. Brad with makeitright, and Angie with her involvement in the UN and other causes.
    I don’t remember the lady that narrating the piece but she said it was easy to see how Angie could go from wild child to humanitarian. She redirected her energy from something negative to something positive.
    It was really good.
    What was also interested is that they have these nightly questions. The question to night was should x and Angie end their feuding or something like that, should x move on? Any rate 63% said x should move on. 63% said move on x. 37% said she shouldn’t.
    They also had people who called in. One lady said that Angie hadn’t started the feud and it wasn’t on her. I am paraphrasing here. Another lady called in and said that she respecected Angie for her humanitarian work, but she was a some stupid name.
    Except for that one person the segment was totally positive. And 63% said they are tired of x and her whinnying and she should move on. If you can catch it it’s worth a watching. People have real problems to deal with. To listen to some less than talented, homely millionaire cry about a four year marriage she frucked up has gotten more than old. It is now putrid. Peace
    Thank you, after that NYT article I was pissed off at all Journalists and entertainment show. Now this is what they should be focusing on.

    Thank you for writing this.

    foreverangie

  • BrooksBarnesEXPOSED

    oldie, chris good was on awards daily – as is mary b.

  • an oldie

    LOL at the haters screaming “investigate Brangelina’s trust fund distibutions”. The fans donate money to MIR, bought the People mags, all the while not doubt ing Brad and Angelina for one second. The haters didn’t contibute a penny, and yet they want to know where the money goes. To the haters: It’s NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS, because IT”S NOT YOUR MONEY.

  • +++

    dina #1 @ 11/22/2008 at 2:53 am

    ITA. Vogue article didn’t help her guest spot at 30 rock and Oprah’s rating. jook up with Mr. Pee boy are not selling much, so we had this NYT smearing campaign, I wonder how much did Huvane paid this guy ?

    Huvaniston were all out campaigning for the Dog movie, it’s her last effort , if that fail, it’s the end for the 40 y.o hag.

  • LLM

    dina #1 @ 11/22/2008 at 2:53

    ITAW, __ lost this time, Brad has spoken on Okra show, he is very happy with his family period. So if __ still using BA, it just backfire her.
    no mod JJ :lol:

  • CLINIQUA

    By Access Hollywood 31 minutes ago — E! entertainment television has just named supermodel Karolina Kurkova the sexiest woman in the world. Second place on E!’s sexiest list went to Israeli model Bar Rafaeli, who has been linked to Leonardo DiCaprio. Coming in third was Angelina Jolie, while Tom Brady’s babe, Bundchen, finished fourth and Scarlett Johansson rounded out the top five.

    The complete top 10 of E!’s Sexiest Women In The World:

    1. Karolina Kurkova
    2. Bar Rafaeli
    3. Angelina Jolie
    4. Gisele Bundchen
    5. Scarlett Johansson
    6. Adriana Lima
    7. Heidi Klum
    8. Penelope Cruz
    9. Manuela Arcuri
    10. Shakira

    ________________

    What?!! B-b-b-ut…oh dear, where oh where is Maniston??? You mean all that stripping, brazilian waxing…asss up, chin in sand posing for pap after pap, on beach after beach after beach..tanning…oiling up……and NADA….yet, Angelina…who’s been pregnant up to her eyeballs for almost two whole years in a row, places 3rd.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    Hilarious!!!

  • LLM
  • ebmo

    # 309 LLM @ 11/22/2008 at 2:26 am ebmo @ 11/22/2008 at 2:15 am

    I am at EST, i watched it at 11pm, now 2pm it is the 2nd time, I think it is old. But they have a poll about it’s time for X and Angie to burry the hatch (something like that- I forgot)
    60+% say yes
    30+% say no
    I think the public begin to get tired of the triangle.

    +++++++++++++++
    Yep I watched it. Those were the results. It think people cannot help but see that X brings up this crap all the time for publicity, especially when she is worried about a movie coming out. Whine whine whine.

    I have NO sympathy for her whatsoever. Yes, a divorce can be hard. Even a break up can be hard. People split all the time. They had no children together that were devestated. Just her and her insecure neediness.

  • http://justjared dina #1

    There is something in my original statement that jared doesn’t like. I even shortened it. And it is still in moderation. This is making me upset as it seems so arbitrary.

    LLM, it bets the heck out of me. There is nothing negative in my comments at all. No cursing or swearing. I am just detailing what was on the program. It’s been awhile since I’ve been put in moderation so mybe it is just my turn. Who knows.

    Oh well 63% said x should move on. So for me that is really all I need to convey. I posted the original on JJB without problems. Hey Jared I never complain. Peace

  • ebmo

    # 330 CLINIQUA @ 11/22/2008 at 3:11 am By Access Hollywood 31 minutes ago — E! entertainment television has just named supermodel Karolina Kurkova the sexiest woman in the world. Second place on E!’s sexiest list went to Israeli model Bar Rafaeli, who has been linked to Leonardo DiCaprio. Coming in third was Angelina Jolie, while Tom Brady’s babe, Bundchen, finished fourth and Scarlett Johansson rounded out the top five.

    The complete top 10 of E!’s Sexiest Women In The World:

    1. Karolina Kurkova
    2. Bar Rafaeli
    3. Angelina Jolie
    4. Gisele Bundchen
    5. Scarlett Johansson
    6. Adriana Lima
    7. Heidi Klum
    8. Penelope Cruz
    9. Manuela Arcuri
    10. Shakira
    ________________

    What?!! B-b-b-ut…oh dear, where oh where is Maniston??? You mean all that stripping, brazilian waxing…asss up, chin in sand posing for pap after pap, on beach after beach after beach..tanning…oiling up……and NADA….yet, Angelina…who’s been pregnant up to her eyeballs for almost two whole years in a row, places 3rd.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    Hilarious!!!
    +++++++++++++++++++
    They were looking for the sexiest WOMEN!!!!
    I am not sure Aniston qualifies. :lol:

  • an oldie

    # 326 BrooksBarnesEXPOSED @ 11/22/2008 at 2:59 am
    oldie, chris good was on awards daily – as is mary b
    ===================

    Thank you

  • LLM

    ebmo @ 11/22/2008 at 3:15 am

    Did you see Reese W speaking about her divorce, she is doint the opposite of X, she said she has no time for those kind of negative feeling something like that.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Before I shut down for the night I must say that this NYT piece is such utter BULLSHT !!
    That it’s done in a so called ‘reputable’ newspaper’ is even worse. I find it hard to believe that recanting Angie’s past of wearing a small vial of her then husband BBT’s blood, or having sex with him in a limo, would be what I’d want to read about in the Business section of my newspaper with so many other crises happening daily in our financial sector.

    This article is so obscenely stupid, on so many levels, that I have to surmise that this idiot must have graduated from the National Enquirer School of Journalism. Why place any attention on the plight of the needy, when we could be reading more salacious gossip about that orangey 40 yr old thing and her latest boyfriend.

  • warning
  • irma

    Good for People Magazine to straighten this NY Times lies about Angie. I will never buy New York Times. Good journalism should show no bias to anyone.
    I admire Brad & Angie, kudos to their charitable projects.
    God bless the Jolie-Pitt’s.

  • Jill

    Sandy @ 11/22/2008 at 12:52 am
    If Jolie hasn’t done any of this and they are giving away all the
    money they say they are (the pictures and etc) then it should be
    easy enough to prove.
    ********************************************************************************************

    Then get up off your lazy ass and go check it out. You come on here asking a lot of dumbass questions and expect us to do your work for you? Ain’t gonna happen.

  • LLM

    # 330 CLINIQUA

    _ is the pitiest woman in the world and who blames everyone but herself.

  • ebmo

    # 336 LLM @ 11/22/2008 at 3:21 am ebmo @ 11/22/2008 at 3:15 am

    Did you see Reese W speaking about her divorce, she is doint the opposite of X, she said she has no time for those kind of negative feeling something like that.
    +++++++++++++++
    Yep. But then her “not so successful Ex” had no problem whining about how hard it was seeing pictures of Reese and Jake together.

    See a parallel there? He and X need press? Coat tail their Xs who actually have successful careers!

  • http://justjared dina #1

    Why isn’t Owen Wilson doing press with x for the dog movie? Just wondering. good night. Peace

  • LLM

    Good Nite everyone. Nice to talk to you guys.

  • heywood jablomie

    The People mag should just copy the smug NYT “answer” to Republican accusations of biased coverage during the elections, word for word, and throw it back in their faces.

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here