Turns out People magazine's Christina Aguilera baby photo issue, which cost them a reported $1.5 million, sold better than the estimated 1.3 million copies originally thought; it moved 1.45 million on the newsstand.

That's one highlighted stat from the latest tabloid data, which shows People up 5 percent year-to-date, with an average 1.5 million copies moving on the newsstand, according to ABC data being released today. The mag's biggest mover? January's Heath Ledger, which sold 1.8m, thanks to it being the only weekly to close late enough to catch the obit. But that issue is expected to be bested by Jennifer Lopez's newborn twins, with estimates of 1.9m.

And how is the competition faring?

CONTINUED »

Growing its reputation for telling lies with pictures, OK! magazine bounces from last week's issue, where they used a five-year-old photo of Britney Spears to claim she lost weight, to this week's issue, where they crop out Eva Longoria from a photo to make readers believe there's something going on between Orlando Bloom and Jennifer Aniston.

Keeping with its roots, Us Weekly is revving up the denial train. You know, where they take those erroneous reports from less trustworthy weeklies and get sources to deny the reports?

And it's always a good time to take a crap on the reports in other tabloid magazines — Us, after all, used to devote an entire two-page spread to the matter. So what to do when the competition gets its credibility put through the gossip mill shredder? Fiesta!

OK! magazine has been catching flack for its 2003 photo of Britney Spears that supposedly showed the star had lost 15 pounds in four weeks. Thus, Us Weekly's item "See What Britney Spears' Body Really Looks Like."

And what about Star's report that Britney and Kevin Federline reconciled over Easter weekend and were planning a Hawaii trip together? Not true, Us gets a Britney camp member to report, but not before pointing out that the cover photo is from their 2004 honeymoon. In Fiji.

OK! took plenty of flack this week for publishing a five-year-old photo of Britney Spears to back up a cover line claiming she lost 15 pounds in four weeks. But let's not kid ourselves: All the tabloids do it!

Let's see … there's Star's cover about "Brit and Kevin's secret weekend," which features a photo not from their possibly-never-happened weekend, but from their 2004 honeymoon. And Us Weekly, though it doesn't claim its cover photo is recent, used a November 2003 photo of a much younger looking Britney, from an Entertainment Weekly photo shoot, as its cover.

First we have to deal with covers that are missing a baby's legs, and now OLD CELEBRITY PHOTOS? Somebody should lose their Photoshop license.

The tabloids had a good variety of stories this week, with one Angelina and three Britney covers. Life & Style was the only magazine to get desperate with the typical "celebrities starve themselves to get skinny" cover story. Trailblazers, those L&S staffers.

There is, as usual, a plethora of Spears family stories covering Brit's mental illness and Jamie Lynn's upcoming wedding. It's nothing we didn't already know — except for Star's made-up story about Britney and Kevin rekindling their romance. That was very creative.

Also this week: Lindsay realizes she looks old, Perez Hilton needs attention and Jason Wahler stars in yet another reality show. Count us out.

CONTINUED »

Haven't you heard? Britney Spears is on the road to recovery! Sure, you thought this was the case when she finally divorced then-nutjob Kevin Federline and made her David Letterman appearance, but now she's doing Responsible Person things like showing up for work and keeping her hair in tact. And her guest spot on How I Met Your Mother? It's getting rave reviews all around!

OK! applauds the effort: "Her performance was so good, she managed to wow not only the audience, but her co-stars as well." People says Britney "took a major step in reviving her career." Us Weekly is pleased to report on "her big TV comeback."

And it looks like it's only Star who can't get on the happy train. Its new issue's secondary cover story? Britney's "Secret Meltdown."

We're not quite sure how we missed this The Insider segment last week — oh wait, yes we are: We never watch that show. But it featured OK! magazine chief Sarah Ivens walking viewers through the very intricate process of producing a tabloid each week. How do they choose photos? (They look at them!) How do they choose who goes on the cover? (They default to Brangelina!)

So why, one might ask, is OK! popping up on The Insider? Because it's all part of their gossip-sharing arrangement: The CBS-produced tabloid show plugs OK!, and OK! hand delivers their scoops to them instead of the competition.

The tabloids were desperate this week, resorting to Brangelina lies and "Stars Without Makeup!" cover stories. Somehow, Ashlee Simpson's nosejob became relevant again, earning her the front page of Us Weekly. Congrats?

Everyone is still grasping at straws when it comes to Britney — this time she's about to declare bankruptcy and she hates her new life. Not outrageous enough, if you ask us.

Also this week: Lindsay makes excuses, Matthew McConaughey is gross and Heidi Montag gives an exclusive Lauren-bashing. Actually, none of that is particularly new.

CONTINUED »

It's been a slow news week for Hollywood, which means Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt are back to gracing the cover of Us Weekly and Brangelina are having problems again. It's the same song and dance, really.

CONTINUED »

We'll admit it: We miss Crazy Britney. Not that we don't want her to get better and have a huge comeback — we do. But this in-between stage is really boring, and we're not sure how to handle it. The tabloids are obviously feeling our pain, as they choose to either ignore her or report ridiculously over-the-top stories about how she's carrying a paparazzi fetus. Go easy on the mags; they're still learning how to cope.

In other news, babies are everywhere — from Brit and Brangelina to Kate Hudson and Katie Holmes. And, as you may have heard, J.Lo delivered her twins recently. As you can imagine, she was a complete sweetheart during the delivery process.

Also this week: Speidi keeps popping up, Kirsten sets a rehab deadline and Barack tries to snag the highly-coveted tabloid vote.

CONTINUED »

Just how much did People magazine pay for the first photos of Christina Aguilera's baby Max? It depends who you ask — but we've got a very good hunch.

First, remember that no magazine wanted these photos — or wanted them enough. As Jossip relayed two week ago, Christina was looking for a bigger payday than any magazine was willing to offer. She felt her celebrity entitled her to a larger fee; tabloid editors, knowing how poor Xtina sells on the newsstand, couldn't rationalize her demands. (Sales of her naked-pregnant Marie Claire cover weren't so hot. Neither was her wedding in OK!.)

That meant no tabloid published the photos in the week of Max's birth, which is when something like that is, uh, supposed to happen. (Um, Shiloh?)

OK!'s Sarah Ivens was said to be offering the biggest dowry, but then Aguilera's camp insisted whoever bought the photos couldn't run pics of Nicole Richie's new baby at the same time. OK! was bidding for both when Christina dropped that bombshell and, rather than cave to her demands, we understand OK! left the bidding war.

So who's pocketbooks were left? Turns out, just People's; Christina and Max appear on this week's cover, out today. (Somehow they got Page Six to play nice with the details.)

And just how much cash changed hands?

CONTINUED »

Americans walking through the check-out aisle do, in fact, care how much they pay to read exclamation points attached to photos of Britney Spears on the covers of tabloids. Which is why, when Bauer upped by $1 the price of In Touch and Life & Style under pressure from wholesalers (who get a cut of the sale), newsstand sales dropped by a third. But that was two months ago, and customers have, at least in part, been drawn back to the incessant Brangelina coverage.

But with rate hikes planned across the celeb weekly board, how will the others fare?

CONTINUED »

"Christina has an inflated sense of her own value and seems to expect an extortionate amount of money for these baby pictures," says a bitter source, who might as well work at OK!, speaking to The Scoop. Negotiations between Aguilera and OK! crumbled when when the magazine wouldn't guarantee a full-cover photo of Christina and her baby Max, who she just delivered, because of concerns over newsstand sales. (Supposedly her naked-and-pregnant Elle cover didn't do as well as hoped.)

Which means Aguilera and Jordan Bratman's newborn, after months of being tailed by the paparazzi, is worth less out of the womb than inside: They won't be appearing on the cover of any celebrity tabloid this week.

Or is the real problem that Xtina's photo contract forbids whoever buys her shots from running any pics of Nicole Richie and Joel Madden's new baby girl Harlow Winter?

Because the tabs missed Heath Ledger's death last week, this week we are treated to multiple angles of the actor's life: He was an awful person! He was a great person! He was addicted to drugs! He tried to get help! TMZ wore us out with this last week. Let's move on.

The biggest news, of course, is Angelina's pregnancy. You know what this means: Expect a bombardment of Brangelina covers for the next nine months.

In other news, Lynne Spears tries to act like a mother, Heidi claims to be religious and Miley Cyrus is the next Britney. God help us all.

CONTINUED »

OK! magazine might be willing to reach deep into its pockets for scoops, but when it comes to the paper the tabloid is printed on, they're coming up empty.

If you'll take a gander at this week's issue, you'll notice the paper stock is lighter, which means the paper itself is thinner, and more prone to bleed-through. That's because the Northern & Shell mag downgraded its paper stock as a cost-cutting measure. (The more to ply you with, Jamie-Lynn.)

Not only might readers find the Richard Desmond-owned tabloid cheap, but advertisers are, too. And they're not happy.

In some issues of the magazine examined, full-page color ads are bleeding through to the opposite page, obscuring editorial, and vice versa. One such instance is a full-page Quaker ad for the brand's Sweet & Salty Crunch Granola Bars.

OK!'s Quaker account is a significant one: They've been advertising inside the magazine in every issue, we're told, and closed the account off to other celeb weeklies without much consideration. And that might make sense, since OK!'s Midwest ad sales director, Jeremy Greenspan, is married to a one Sarah Greenspan, who just happens to be the associate media director at Quaker's agency OMD in Chicago.

To be sure, nepotism in publishing and advertising isn't exactly surprising; relationships, whether platonic or otherwise, run this business.

But who, then, is looking out for Quaker when it comes to their crappy-looking advertising in OK!? The suits at PepsiCo might want to know.

Since they didn’t get a chance to write about Heath Ledger’s last days, this week OK! covered America’s emotional train wreck, Jessica Simpson

In an article subtly titled “Jessica Dumped!,” OK! says that Tony Romo had left Simpson after the Cowboys lost in the playoffs. The article also claims that Jess and Ash were no longer sisters who were also BFF. F!

Not true at all, shouts the Simpson camp. Her lawyers say the OK! piece “is based on nothing more than rumor, gossip and innuendo." Um, yeah?

CONTINUED »

Heath Ledger had the audacity to die right after the tabloids closed this week's issues. Talk about rude. But some other actor died recently, and some of the magazines decided he was worth a mention. Janice Min even went so far as to dig up some background info on this "Brad Renfro" character.

In place of actual news, we get the usual: Britney continues to be crazy, Scientology continues to be creepy and Jessica Simpson continues her romantic losing streak.

Jamie Lynn is also back in the spotlight this week, and Star and Life & Style managed to create the exact same cover featuring Brit's little sister. Coincidence? Intern Whitney thinks not.

CONTINUED »

Congrats to Lynne Spears! This week, her daughters had a monopoly on all the covers — Jamie Lynn still has some work to do, however, because she only appeared on one compared to Britney's four. It seems the crazy trumps teen pregnancy every time.

Besides the onslaught of Britney drama, there's lots of Hills gossip and Hollywood stars who still refuse to come out of the closet. What more could you ask for? Exclusives with Tara Reid and Amy Winehouse? OK! has you covered!

So let's travel to a world where suicide threats and kidnapping are the norm, and Britney seems to have hit rock bottom. But for some reason, Intern Whitney still isn't so sure.

CONTINUED »

FALSE PROMISES OK! mag told advertisers its lawsuit-inducing Jamie Lynn Spears preggers issue would sell two million copies, or twice its usual sell-thru. Except scan data shows it sold just 900,000 copies (or 1.3 million with subscriptions). Is it us, or are those numbers not the same? [WWD]

For a sixteen year-old, the fun part of having a baby is being pregnant. After that, things start to get messy. And stinky. And totally no fun on a Friday night.

Similarly, the fun part of Jamie Lynn Spears getting pregnant for OK! magazine was running the exclusive. And let’s be real, magazines that judged Lynne Spears for selling the story to them were just bitter that they didn’t have the scoop. Us Weekly, we’re looking at you.

Anyway, when Heat, a British tabloid ran the quotes from the original interview as an exclusive without crediting OK!, OK! was not okay with it. (See what we did there?)

Now OK! is suing Heat over copyright infringement, which is sort of like the first birthday party equivalent of running an exclusive. A copyright suit isn’t as the exciting as the original story, but OK! could still end up with some nice presents.