The NYT ran a story today (thank you contributor Jess) about Angelina Jolie putting editorial requirements on the exclusive interview after the Twins were born. Essentially, they had to focus on the good Angelina and not, say, the Hollywood Angelina (whatever that is).
While they got a big payout, I can't help but think that People could get smeared a bit. The magazines are 'fun reading,' that is, Bill Gates and Sec. Gen. of the UN Ban Ki Moon don't grab it while waiting for a flight. (I do, if someone left it on a bench). But, it's not as much fun if they're going to double stuff their fluff with personality-saving stories. I want to hear about crazy stuff and the expensive purses, not charity.
I, Wellsmus, citizen of the world, pointed back to the Bono + Angelina + Jeffrey Sachs "End of Poverty" ideas when they came out in 2004-5. After throwing money (rather carelessly) at problems for decades, their solution was to throw a huge amount of money at the same problems, but this time it would work because the amounts would just be enormous.
Not only can we call Angelina to the floor on something like this, but I can't get up on her shoe collection, or amounts of platinum vs. gold. Maybe she doesn't wear jewelry at all.
Most critically, I need this information to feed friends of mine who filter out the interesting stuff and tell it to me, which has been a rich part of my life.
I need dirt, I want it all over her! C'mon magazines! Gimme what I really want.
Oh, and as far as a dirty actor who hasn't done as well with his image, Mr. Tom Cruise, at least his movies this year have been or will be more interesting.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment