OlderPeople 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.”
Share This Post:
961 Comments
NYToutedthemediaho @ 11/21/2008 at 9:20 pm —-well you twit with an IO of 80 or 90 the most..Let’s see if your IQ can comprehend…..It’s that NYT stooped to level of the raggazines to make money off the JP’s. OMG we are talking about NYT….and the as@hole is quoting Bonni Fuller….is he fcuking kidding me????..Oyyy NYT is is quoting Fuller as a legit quote…ROTFLMAO :lol: how pathetheic is that, can they and tabloids and supposed legit media get get more sick….OK, the media ho…who is ******** anyone that gets in her 50 feet radious…is supposed to be handled with kid gloves b/c she is FOURTY and does not want kids but fakes it for 6 .years as if she does…we have all the interviews and videos pathetic liar JEN…
Soo Jen hens..you are some sick puppies…get a life or pray for X not to be dumped by JM again…oyy how embaressing… well maybe he’ll do it on ET instead of TMZ… :lol:
piper, with a low @ 11/21/2008 at 9:40 pm
Of course the hens were on this blog talking about how Brad Pitt was going to throw AJ under the best and talk about whiny X (can’t say Jen to much or you get moderated) for his movie. None of them came back to gloat.
# 36 fan @ 11/21/2008 at 5:56 pm
Oh for fcuk’s sake! This is ridiculous. This is the THIRD POST YOU COPIED WITHOUT CREDITING ME! Go find your own ironic rebuttals to the NYT and stop stealing the ones I found! Nobody likes a credit-stealer!
under the bus
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…….
—————————————-
Excellent, intelligent post
Angelina Jolie said last year that if there’s gossip about her or her family she’s not likely to worry about it unless it’s in the NY Times.
bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahha
bwhahahahahahahahahahah
bwhahahhahahaha
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.
When the NYT sinks to the level of a Rag, then there is not too much left to worry about. A rag is a rag.
# 79 African Girl @ 11/21/2008 at 6:44 pm
ALL HAIL THE POWER OF THE JOLIE!!!
Rotflmao! I looooooooooooooooves it!!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++
AG -
It’s like I posted on another site this morning - the media is just pissed that Angie is better at their job than THEY are. These are people who went to college for 4 years to learn the ins and outs of the biz…and along comes the upstart who graduated high school at 16, lived a while youth and was candid about it, grew up and decided to put an end to the one-way relationship she had with the media. The media hates it that Angie plays their game better than they do. For years she just did interviews to promote her movies, and as she said, she had no real purpose in life. But once she found a purpose she realized she could use the media’s (and the public’s) interest in her to achieve the greater goal of highlighting humanitarian issues. What’s ironic is that the media was perfectly happy to use her without regard for her personally…but when she turns the tables on them, THEN suddenly it’s a problem! They’re just jealous little b#tches who want to take their ball back now that they’re losing the game.
Incredible! Every one wants a piece of the money Angelina Jolie generates now. She is not done, au contraire! She has just been made bigger, more famous, more powerful
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
GOD BLESS THE JOLIE-PITTS!
NYToutedthemediaho @ 11/21/2008 at 9:54 pm
Your one troll mission is too funny. You clearly are not hurting AJ or the fans. worst have been written about AJ and she is still standing. Stating that she is smart and master of her career and image is a walk in the park.
The New York Times isn’t fit to wipe anyone’s a**.
Come to think of it, that would be redundant.
Angelina is a wonderful person who cares deeply for others who are less fortunate. She is just trying to live her life and raise her family. It is not right that she is being attacked during the the time when award season is about to start.
All should look at the good that she does. She is an talented actress. I really don’t care the the stuff that NYT is writing. It does not change my opinion about her at all.
# 85 African Girl @ 11/21/2008 at 7:01 pm
Ted is an idiot, How can he say someone is finally listenting to his calling AJ out for something he also says other celebrities do?
What sense does that make???!!
++++++++++++++++
Ted is worse than an idiot - HE’S A JEALOUS IDIOT. I put 100% of Ted’s dislike of Angie down to the fact that she’s smarter than him and beats him at his own game. Brad had him barred from all the O13 PR events last year…but he, like X, is STILL kissing Brad’s ass. He constantly says things like “Brad’s a sweetie”. Yeah, he’s ANGIE’S “sweetie”…and therein lies the problem! Ted and X both need to get over it already!
NYToutedthemediaho
Whose interview or pictures would People, Time mag, NY Times or any of those sites you posted from preferred to have today, tomorrow or 10 years from now. Aniston or Jolie
If you and these hypocrites writing these articles are truthful it would be Jolie. Aniston’s Vogue mag raced through the internet because of her remark from Jolie. Very few cared what she said to the new york times. But people want to read,see and post anything having to do with Angelina.
Today the new york times just made Angelina more powerful. Thanks for clicking on Angelina name on all these sites. It just tells the owners of the sites to write more about her.
# 203 Passing Through @ 11/21/2008 at 9:46 pm —
Hey I know some JJ fans got on my case re giving credit about two years ago b/c I wanted someone to give credit where it was due …But that long ago….I really think it is the right thing to do …B/C someone takse the time to search for it or like you did last night scanned it for all of us and bdj hunts all those articles…it is JMHO necessary to give credit….
Whoa the hen is having a meltdown. Too funny.
#214
If you didn’t put up with a cheating husband to stay married, why the hell are you here whining about his cheating years after the divorce?
http://msn.jolienyt.com/html
November 21st, 2008 at 8:58 pm 28
The latest NYT missive regarding Angelina’s media prowess, is definitely a hit. It’s payback and deflection regarding Jennifer Aniston’s Vogue interview which used Angelina’s name to kick up sales and interest in her doggie rom-com this month. That was a fail in every way imaginable, as Aniston was ridiculed for not only using Jolie, but the whole world was screaming, ‘Move On,’ and calling her a whiny, weak lame.
It didn’t help that Brad Pitt followed Aniston’s Oprah appearance in which she again talks ‘Brangelina,’ and didn’t say word one about Aniston. Double fail. So this nyt piece on Jolie, is in response to that whole brouhaha - it is a CAA, Huvane hit for Aniston their coddled TV cash cow & puppet. The Deathstar (aka CAA) VS Jolie.
They got to the ‘new’ LA based entertainment reporter and requested a hit on Jolie. Nice. Jolie may be smart, but they have the connections to really do her in if they want. Why would they want to? 15% of the Aniston millions. You can’t have Jen flame out because of a bad Wintour decision, so you get some NYT piece that digs up all Jolie’s old People mags featuring her kids. Odd, sure.
Notice how anytime Aniston and Huvane make a misstep (that has nothing to do with Jolie) we’ll usually see a Jolie smear immediately follow in the mainstream press.
Deflection, deflection, deflection.
The Deathstar is very close to facing a major defection.
new york tyms!ppprrrtttttt!
# 93 Natascha @ 11/21/2008 at 7:09 pm
juju @ 11/21/2008 at 7:03 pm anonymous @ 11/21/2008 at 6:57 pm
________________________________
Ted C?? Man, you really are desperate aren’t you?
People mag?? So are you losers!!
+++++++++++++++++
ROTFLMAO. I’m a celeb in need of publicity…who would I rather have at my back -
- People magazine - subsidiary of Time, Inc., weekly circulation of 3.9MIL, known ass kissers but harmless, website that gets over 6MIL unique hits per day
- Ted C - piddly paid gossip columnist/blogger, fired former editor of a movie magazine, demoted former tv show reporter, cranky self-proclaimed “fagola” who can’t be trusted with your dog, let alone your reputation, website housed as part of a much larger site for a cable tv station, daily unique hits of about 27 trolls…
Hmmmmm….decisions, decisions, decisions…
Okay…call me silly…BUT…I’m going with the Peeps mag…
Stupid trolls…
Good evening to all BAMPZSKV fans. Just got home and what do I see People bytch slapping some really ugly person trying to make his bones by using Angie. Isn’t it just so wonderful how the truth always comes out. Peace
Um… @ 11/21/2008 at 6:10 pm 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?
#####
Okay, this post goes into the Dumbest Post Hall of Fame.
Final analysis: Mush for brains LOL
I’m subscribing to People Mag today. :-D
I say all of us do the same, that can - and make sure you let them know why.
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 … 39 » Show All
Comment and Share!
E-mail to a Friend or share on Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and more!