While yesterday's instance of People.com crediting In Touch for breaking the "Denise Richards and Richie Sambora break up" story may have been one for the history textbooks, it was also an instance of life repeating itself in the tabloid world: In Touch already broke that story — a year ago, in the May 22, 2006 issue.

Meanwhile, it's worth taking a peek at the bottom of the cover: "Britney Reveals: It's a girl!" We all know how well that turned out.

We're witnessing history here, folks. Something that perhaps you've never witnessed before is taking place: People.com is crediting another source for a breaking story.

And not just any source, but the direct competition. In Touch, to be precise. Why so groundbreaking? Because People.com is known throughout the industry as one to never give credit for where a story breaks; they simply phone up a star's rep or find a "friend" to confirm a story. (To be fair, People.com isn't alone in the practice.)

But today's instance – with the story about Denise Richards and Richie Sambora breaking up – is "no accident." A well-placed tattler reports People.com is "joining hands" with In Touch, intentionally playing nice with the Bauer tab, all as a maneuver to … wait for it, wait for it … go on the Us Weekly assault. Both In Touch and People "hate them."

And no wonder: For two weeks straight (will tomorrow's issue make three?), Us has dedicated double pages to calling out the mistakes of others while keeping mum on its own. What's next, a Star-OK! tryst?

And today, a little arithmetic problem, courtesy of the only tabloid that's never, ever been wrong.

What do you get when you cross one People: Half Their Size! cover with the People: Tyra 'You Call This Fat?' Banks cover?

Answer: The current issue of Us Weekly!

Thanks for playing everyone.

And remember—when it comes to selling magazines, imitation really is the highest form of flattery.

Walk by the newsstand or flip on any of the entertainment tabloid shows and you'll see Drew Barrymore staring back at you from the cover of this week's People, where she's anointed the Most Beautiful Person of all 100 Most Beautiful Persons.

But perhaps her cover isn't an example is celebrating surface-level beauty worship as it is an example of corporate synergy.

People is published by Time Inc., which is owned by Time Warner. And guess what movie studio just put out Drew's recent flick, Music & Lyrics? That'd be Time Warner's Warner Bros. studio.

And which studio is behind Lucky You, which debuts this Friday and stars Eric Bana and, oh wait, Drew Barrymore? That'd be Warner Bros.

And what studio is behind Drew's upcoming thriller He Loves Me? Ah, yes, that'd be Warner Bros., too.

So congrats on being so beautiful, Drew. Dick Parsons is drooling.

Larry Hackett can rest assured that he owns the personal trauma niche. After Bauer's In Touch attempted to invade on People's territory by slapping the Virginia Tech tragedy on the cover last week, editor Richard Spencer saw newsstand sales slide. A normal 1.2 million sales clip stumbled to just 900,000, or below, making it the worst selling issue in a year. (Loose-lipped enemies will say two years.)

And in other news from Keith Kelly: Life & Style had its best week ever, notching 900k at the newsstand (congrats, Pasetsky!), while Us Weekly's own 900k copies were down from last year's 1 million. Meanwhile, Bauer chief Hubert Boehle has approved plans to test half of Life & Style and In Touch issues with a jump in the $1.99 newsstand price to $2.19.

Which is just their way of saying: If you're not going to buy our heartfelt issue about a college campus mourning, you're gonna have to pay a premium for half-truths about Angelina Jolie.

We interrupt our foray into an evening without you mensches to update you on one serious development, and a forgettable one.

First, MSNBC is dropping its Don Imus simulcast, reports TVNewser, validating the argument we made only to ourselves that even Steve Capus can't rationalize racist ad dollars.

And second, TeenPeople.com is folding, reports MediaWeek. It'll merge with papa People.com by the end of the month. Supposedly the brand is healthy – if it weren't, "we wouldn’t continue to use the brand" – so much so that Time Inc. can't support a print or online edition.

According to a recent Media Life survey, this supermarket checkout counter just ain't big enough for the half-dozen or so celebrity rags out there. Three quarters of readers agreed there will likely be a shakeout sometime in the celeb titles sometime in the next few years, and nearly half agreed that OK! would be the first to go:

Meanwhile, Life & Style could be next to go (though In Touch is likely "safe") while the revamped TV Guide was essentially "a disaster." People was voted least endangered and the best overall, while Star—though picked as the third-safest title—was also voted as the publication that does "the worst job." And according to media types, Bonnie Fuller won't be at the helm for very much longer:

Asked will Fuller be working for American Media in six month, two thirds said no, agreeing with the statement: "No way. It was an ill fit for a brilliant editor. I believe the rumors that she’s headed for TMZ or Hachette Filipacchi."

That's the thing about media types. Despite the overabundance of celebrity-obsessed rags, they never really seem to get "starstruck." Unfortunately for Star, the same could also be said about Bonnie.

As others have tried before, Time Inc. is preemptively taking a stab at protecting an investment — in exclusive photos. The publisher is sending out notices to celeb blogs far and wide that People is the only outfit licensed to publish the first pics of Patrick Dempsey and his newborn twins, which they've purchased exclusively.

Naturally, in this era of celebrity blogs, no photos are safe. And there's no such thing as a respected embargo when 13-year-olds are running the show.

CONTINUED »

Ahh, remember back when it used to take no less than five People reporters to file one story about Britney/Paris/Lindsay's latest one night stand?

Well, those days are long gone. And so are half the staff. After throngs of People people departed during Time Inc.'s involuntary mass exodus, it looks as though the head honchos are calling for even more budget cuts.

The streamlining of editorial duties continues at People, which has pruned its workforce as part of Time Inc.'s drive to cut 289 employees. The weekly has reorganized its Specials department, in charge of producing stellar newsstand performers like Sexiest Man Alive and Hottest Bachelors, so that the regular weekly staff will also produce the themed titles.

And if that's not enough, the Specials department even got booted from its luxe 29th floor space!

The Specials department used to sit on the 29th floor, but now its office will be taken up by People's Stylewatch staff. Stylewatch started as a column in the magazine but has grown to a ten-times-a-year spin-off and has its own staff helmed by editor Susan Kaufmann.

Yes, yes, who cares, but what will happen to Specials??

[Specials editor, Liz] Sporkin will continue to oversee Specials, though it is unclear if employees from the department will be dispatched to other People assignments.

Which means, once again, People's editorial staff is left cowering under their desks in ready anticipation of being unceremoniously fired.

And suddenly, it's the still-employed, overworked and underpaid freelancers who are having the last laugh.

Next on the triumphant freelancers' agenda? Health insurance.

People editor Larry Hackett has just notified staff about last night's significance: it was the day the D.C., Miami, Chicago, and Austin bureaus closed. Lucky for those still on the payroll, he "couldn't let this day pass without acknowledging the extraordinary contributions of all the colleagues who worked in those offices." And the assholes in the copy department, who are the only ones with not enough people volunteering to quit.

Larry's full memo, after the jump.

CONTINUED »

• TV vets Gail Berman and Lloyd Braun form a joint production company. Related: George is getting "very upset."

• Scooter Libby didn't call Tim Russert up to tell him Valerie Plame worked for the CIA; he just called to bitch about something he'd seen on NBC's Hardball.

• Jack Shafer: The WSJ insinuates Money Honey funny business by not insinuating anything at all.

• The Top Chef finale is spoiled again for all those die-hard Top Chef fans who missed it the first time.

• A Time Inc. exec is suddenly insisting that People's not merging with Entertainment Weekly, which begs the question: is People merging with Entertainment Weekly?

• After the pre-Super Bowl press bonanza, even Chicago Bears fans are sick of hearing about the Chicago Bears.

It's not just Ann Moore and John Huey rallying the Time Inc. troops (or what's left of them). People's news editor Rob Howe just shot off a blast to his list of stringers who might be worried whether their cheques will ever be arriving. Rob's note reads, in part:

I would also like to reassure you. I'm told that many stringers have expressed concern, wondering whether they will still be needed. This answer is quite simple. Yes, absolutely. As we move towards a model where journalists report and write their stories, your work will become even more valuable.

Hopefully you've taken your Ivy League education to read that as: You're going to be paid the same, possibly less, to do more work. Enjoy!

Rob's full pep rally, after the jump.

CONTINUED »

Is there really a nice way to go about firing someone? We're not entirely sure, but we can certainly think of a few tacky ways, and topping that list is the dreaded Speakerphone Termination. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened at People Magazine today, when 44 editorial employees were let go, comprising approximately 15% of to the total job cuts at TIme Inc.

As The NYT reports:

Employees at People said they felt “shell-shocked” as Larry Hackett, People’s managing editor, delivered the news by speakerphone from the magazine’s New York offices. The news “was not sugar-coated,” one employee said, as employees were told that the company had to cut costs.

Both Time and People are scaling back their practice of using several correspondents to report and write a single article.

Well sure, we all joked about the fact that it took no less than six reporters to write a single story on Britney Spears, but slashing People's editorial staff? Eliminating Time magazine's bureaus in Los Angeles, Chicago and Atlanta? And over speakerphone, no less!

At least Time Inc. is already slashing its costs, eliminating the pesky need for pink-slips when a simple mass phone call will suffice. Next time, though, try and show a little class and do it over the bullhorn, 'kay?

Earlier:
Time Inc. Still 'Dedicated,' But Doesn't Need Dedication From As Many
Time Inc. All Jazzed About This Internet Thing, That's Why It's Cutting Jobs!

Remember earlier this morning, when you opened up the New York Post, flipped to Page Six, and read the breaking news that Julia Roberts was expecting a third child with husband Danny Moder? You weren't the only ones — People magazine did the same thing! Except whereas you went and emailed the link to your friends, People went and called Roberts' rep and – OMG! – confirmed the report it just read, and then slapped on the "exclusive" label.

You know where this is going: The easiest Scoop Wars battle, like, ever.

From this morning's Page Six, which goes online in the wee hours of the morning:

JULIA Roberts has a hit movie out and two more films on the way - but her biggest project at the moment is a bun in the oven.

Page Six has learned that the auburn-tressed Oscar winner is pregnant with her third child and will give birth next summer. The happy news comes as Roberts flies high in the nation's No. 5 picture, "Charlotte's Web," in which she provides the voice for the beloved spider.

From People's website, posted at 10:55am:

Hazel and Finn will soon have to share their famous mom's attention: Julia Roberts is expecting her third child with husband Danny Moder, PEOPLE has confirmed exclusively.

Roberts is due this summer, her rep, Marcy Engelman, tells PEOPLE.

We've said it before and we'll say it again: "Confirming" a scoop from a competitor does not make your report an "exclusive." So when we awoke the gossip gods and asked them who shall win this Scoop War, they stammed "Uh, Page Six, you fucktards" and rolled over and back into their slumber.

Not content to merely name the sexiest man alive or let Time magazine declare who gets the nod as Person of the Year, People is declaring Family of the Year, with the award going to obvious favorite Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. Clearly the criteria for being bestowed with the honor included such family-friendly acts as doing a photoshoot with a family that is not yours for W, but getting beyond how editors chose Brangelina is a look inside their unit:

Asked which of the three kids rules the Jolie-Pitt roost, [Angelina] says, "I bet if you asked Brad, he'd say Zahara. Mad is very smart, but he's got a certain sense of calm. Zahara is possibly the funniest person I've ever met in my life. So dramatic and creative and loud and charming. She's definitely the biggest personality in the house."

Well, second only to Angelina Jolie's lips and Brad Pitt's grey facial hair.

• Jessica Biel is Derek Jeter's new beard.

• The Devil Wears Prada TV producers shadowing Marie Claire editor Joanna Coles might need to find a new personality to follow.

• Michael Jackson indeed showed at the World Music Awards, but he didn't fail not to disappoint. Meanwhile, his rider demands put sister Janet's to shame.

• People magazine names George Clooney the sexiest man alive. Isaiah Washington has one more reason to laugh at Patrick Dempsey.

• Rachael Ray faces her first sex scandal, adds EVOO.

• Sacha Baron Cohen sits for an interview that doesn't involve the words "sexy time" or "vagine."

As you've likely heard, former Doogie Houser and current How I Met Your Mother star Neil Patrick Harris came out of the closet last week, announing he's a big gay. And who does he tell his story to? Why People magazine, of course. First Lance Bass gets his cover story, then T.R. Knight gives the Time Inc. tabloid the "exclusive" on his homo habits, and now Harris has shaken hands with Larry's Hackett. Because while Vanity Fair is where celebrities reveal they were molested as a child, People is the place to spread the word that you're a bottom.

What better way to kick off a week of gossip than mull over a Scoop War from last week? In the red corner is E!'s Planet Gossip columnist Marc Malkin, who hit his blog at 7:45pm on Friday to report Hilary Swank was injured on the New York set of her new flick P.S. I Love You (seen here on set). In the blue corner is People magazine, which had the same item, nearly verbatim, posted at 11pm. So who wins this minor battle? Let's look at the evidence.

Writes Malkin:

Swank and her co-star Gerard Butler were filming a scene in which Butler performs a striptease. "His suspender snapped and hit Hilary above the eye," one source tells me.

Production was shut down today and it may also be cancelled on Monday, according to my sources.

"It was close," another source says. "If she was hit just a little bit lower, it would have been a major eye injury."

And here's People's item, posted over two hours later and credited to one of its own "sources."

Hilary Swank was injured Thursday on the set of her new film, P.S. I Love You in New York.

During a scene with costar Gerard Butler, in which the actor performs a striptease for Swank, Butler's suspenders became snagged and hit the actress on her forehead, a source tells PEOPLE. Swank received medical treatment, which included sutures for the cut, and filming was halted.

Per the source, Swank is recovering and in good spirits, and production will resume on Monday.

We're handing marathoner Malkin the battleflag on this one. Not only was his item posted first (and really, that's all that matters when it comes to scoops), but he had the more robust details. Not that People is claiming this was their exclusive, to be sure. How come? A source at People tells us: "The general policy [if we have a story that someone else had first] is to get the info from one of our own sources, so we don't have to credit the original report. But if someone else reported it first, then we don't mark it 'exclusive.' But we probably won't credit the original source, either."

Yesterday, it was Us Weekly vs. the Associated Press in the Scoop Wars when it came to who had the news first of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes wedding date. Today, People is throwing down with Fashion Week Daily over news that Elle fashion director (or, as most people know her, the most witty judge on Project Runway) Nina Garcia and husband David Conrod are expecting their first child together.

On People.com yesterday (emphasis ours):

Project Runway judge Nina Garcia and her husband, David Conrod, a senior managing director at Guggenheim Capital, are expecting their first child together in March, Garcia confirms exclusively to PEOPLE.

On Fashion Week Daily, last Thursday:

Nina Garcia, Elle fashion director and Project Runway judge, can now add mother-to-be to her formidable r�sum�. The Colombian native and her husband, David Conrod, a senior managing director at Guggenheim Capital LLC, are happily expecting their first child next March.

This is where we deliver a pun on People editor Larry Hackett's name .. something about a Hack Job.

So, People really paid $1 million for photos of Anna Nicole Smith's fake wedding to Howard K. Stern? Well, they really did get their money's worth.

Just look at the beautiful photos on People.com. Ok, who are we kidding? There are flippin' terrifying! We know her son just died but jeeze. Couldn't somebody hose her down first?

They all honestly, really do look they were taking with a disposable camera. We especially think the shot about (with the a random dude standing behind Smith and Stern) is worth more like $5 than $50,000.

And as the photo after the jump hints, Anna Nicole should have definitely worn sunglasses. At least the baby is really, really cute.

CONTINUED »