Either the Jonas Brother's publicist needs to get more original, or Us Weekly needs to stop biting off People's skeeze. Identical quotes about Joe Jonas' new girlfriend, actress Camilla Belle, appeared in Weekly's publication just hours after they were in People, but the both publications attributed the quotes to a source that talked directly to them.
So plagiarism, or just a slow news day? Compare and contrast, after the jump.
CONTINUED »
Everyone has a theory about what led to the split between Madonna and Guy Ritchie. Also, everyone has a theory about who each of them slept first as they both realized their marriage was unsalvageable. Common wisdom says Madonna was slugging Yankee Alex Rodriguez, while the tabloid Us Weekly went with a less obvious choice for Guy Ritchie's paramour: a one Kelly Reilly, the redhead star or Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes. Except, oops, they're totally backtracking now! CONTINUED »
Us Weekly — the celebrity tabloid published by Barack Obama supporter Jann Wenner, who has used the magazine to portray the candidate favorably and his opponents not so much — asked readers to predict who would win the presidential election. Bad news for Mr. Wenner:
The triple murder tragedy of Jennifer Hudson's family wasn't going to be ignored by the celebrity weeklies. Sadly, multiple deaths are what it takes to get a black girl on the cover of a tabloid. The editors of each weekly, then, had to consider how the competition was going to play the game. Only People and Us gave Hudson A1 treatment, while every other magazine at least included her in a sidebar or footer.
Life & Style and OK! ended up with the same photo. Only the Globe went with a picture of Jennifer with her mouth closed — because nothing says tragedy like eyes staring into the horizon and a mouth agape.
And the honor of Going Full Exploitative goes to, not surprisingly: CONTINUED »
Ooooh, they've gone and done it. After shafting them last week by releasing news of the divorce after the tabloids hit newsstands, Madonna and Guy Ritchie are being paid back by the celeb weeklies with less than favorable reports. Only People, long in bed with Madonna's camp via rep Liz Rosenebrg, attempts any sense of kid glove treatment with the coverline, but inside they detail the "battle" over David Banda and Rocco. Us Weekly and OK!, running with nearly identical photos as People, are notable for what they don't provide: Neither sides with Madonna nor Guy here, instead painting them both as loathsome characters.
But most interesting this week are the Bauer tabloids take: In Touch went with a Jennifer Aniston-Courteney Cox "Yes We Had Plastic Surgery" tale and Life & Style opted for Angelina Jolie "admitting" to a love affair. And that's half the job of a celeb weekly editor: Predicting what the other magazines are going to run with, and either trying to do it better, or move on another angle. Bless them, because a world without obsessing over Madonna's divorce is one we'd choose to live in.
Know what sucks about Madonna breaking news of her (hopefully going to be messy!) divorce on a Wednesday? That not only did she usurp the printing schedule for this week's tabloids, but she forced them into running benign items about her that depicted her as a great mom (much to Guy Ritchie's dismay). Except this spread in this week's People, which shows just how much daughter Lourdes is adopting mom's style, looks quite familiar. CONTINUED »
This week, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt entered New York's orbit at the same time as Britney Spears, setting off everybody's e-meter and forcing the Catholic church to issue a statement that, no, the apocalypse was not before us. But what Ms. Jolie did allow, for the first time in many weeks, is to walk a red carpet (at the Changeling premiere) and have every tabloid pounce. Indeed, the five weeklies that hit newsstands every Wednesday all feature Jolie in some manner. But two in particular took wildly different approaches to the actress' lack of post-twins baby weight. CONTINUED »
In early 2005, the nation was shocked by the official revelation, after months of tabloid covers suggesting it, that Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt were splitting up. Of course, the official announcement came long after the couple made the decision to break up — and, stupidly, after the Christmas holiday when nobody cares about the news — but just in time for beacon of journalism Us Weekly to sic reporters Mara Reinstein and Joey Bartolomeo on the couple and, in five days, spit out a 40,000-word (large type) print book. An amazing feat of (ripped off?) reporting and celebrity news spin, to be sure.
And now, People is ready to carry on the tradition of rush publishing. CONTINUED »
Just like it is weird, but increasingly common, to get your political analysis on television from The View, so is it to see former Us Weekly and Star editor Bonnie Fuller giving debate feedback, but that is just the crazy world we live in, so let's run with it.
After she finished Twittering about how Sarah Palin is Annie Oakley (Annie Oakley is now the de facto reference to any woman candidate), the former editrix moved over to Huffpost to give her 2 cents on why John McCain should be worried about Sarah Palin slipping him poison or removing his oxygen tank while he sleeps:
CONTINUED »
As the tabloid industry wonders whether its readership has really plateaued or is just going into hibernation during the economic meltdown, publishers have their hands on some pretty concrete evidence. At Life & Style, the Bauer pub has learned that at least for now, America doesn't care if there's a TomKat v. Brangelina war going on; the issue bombed. In maybe! related! news!, editor Donna Armstrong isn't expected back after maternity leave. And as for mixing celebrity and politics — readers are saying, "Yes please." Us Weekly's Sarah Palin attack issue held the circulation status quo, while People's Palin-sympathetic cover moved an estimated 1.75 million copies (compared to its usual 1.45m); which lends evidence this week's McCain family cover will also do well. And the week after, a special double issue with McCain on one side and Palin on the other!
Certainly we're witnessing a phenomenon here, where newsweeklies like Time and Newsweek are seeing their circulation plummet, while the tabloids have found a new content pool in turning politicos into scandal-crazed A-listers — and taking sides just like they do with Jennifer v. John, Brad v. Angelina, and Brad v. Jen. But what, oh what, might we be witnessing in real time? The regression of the body politic, we're guessing.
Jann Wenner, proving he has style
Bauer has Life & Style. Time Inc.'s People has People StyleWatch. And soon Wenner Media's Us Weekly will have its own fashion spin-off. Despite evidence the faltering economy caused celebrity weeklies' readership to plateau, Jann Wenner is betting a fashion quarterly, launching in the spring, is just what American women want. Inarguably, the demographic's obsession with celebrity style remains; if a trend expert came along and said it was "increasing," we'd believe 'em. So Wenner's bet might be a step in the right direction, given this startling statistic: "[People's] StyleWatch this year raised its guaranteed circulation by 100,000 to 650,000 and now sells more copies on the newsstand than more established fashion monthlies like Elle and Vogue." Then again, Wenner is notorious for being late the game. He still hasn't bothered to invest much cash in the Internet, purposefully allowing others to blaze the trail (and bleed coffers) figuring out their web strategy, which he'll be more than happy to replicate. He's shown he's willing to cut corners. And when American Media tried leveraging Star's expertise to launch the style book Celebrity Living, it flamed out in spectacular fashion. And let's not forget Wenner's other spin-off attempts. He tried remaking Rolling Stone into a reality show and, well, viewers just loved it, didn't they?
'Some readers trying to find the article online may have been surprised by the political coverage there. The magazine does not own the domain name USWeekly.com which is a vehement anti-Obama site, featuring articles like “We’re Not Fooled Barack — Nor Will We Be.” A representative from Us Weekly said that Wenner Media, which owns Us Weekly, had approached USWeekly.com when the magazine went weekly in 2000. Wenner did not succeed at buying the site then. The magazine has “no real recourse” since the USWeekly.com site seems to have been established before Us magazine changed its name to Us Weekly, said Mark G. McCreary, a partner at the law firm Fox Rothschild. It is unclear who owns USWeekly.com, but at least one person affiliated with the site had his own opinion on media coverage of the campaigns. In response to an e-mail inquiry, a response from someone using the name Richard Carroll — who is listed as an author on the site — said he did not own it. “We have nothing to discuss,” he wrote, “other than for me to point out to you as I have other reporters who have written: Why the media blackout surrounding Barack Hussein Obama?”' [NYT]
By not even broaching the Sarah Palin subject, Oprah won't subject herself to the aftermath of criticism — since by refusing to book the Republican VP, the talk show queen won't put herself in the awkward situation of celebrating the first woman on a Republican ticket while also pointing out she's a lunatic. But Us Weekly did not take that route. Like Oprah, Us is usually fine sticking with celebrities and staying out of politics. But like Oprah, Us couldn't resist. Oprah backed Obama, and watched her ratings and popularity rating slide. Us did the same, but took the extra step of bashing Palin … and now some readers are furious. Backlash? Commencing. CONTINUED »
'It's true. I am the Elisabeth Hasselbeck of Us Weekly. During our spirited office debates, it's up to me (along with the office's outnumbered Republicans — hey, it's New York City) to defend the old man from Arizona, while the Democrats cheer for Barack Obama like he's a Jonas Brother. For months, I've touted McCain's vast experience and his economic policies without a trace of postmodern irony. (The credit — or, uh, blame — mostly lies with my parents, the only conservative Jews in Detroit). My take on his VP pick? "I think she's fascinating!" I chirped to my editor in chief early on September 1. "She's a mother of five and she hunts!"'
That's Mara Reinstein, the Us Weekly writer behind the "Babies, Lies & Scandal" cover that, some might argue, was part of Jann Wenner's master plan to elect Obama and stunt McCain. Reinstein's (and Min's) insistence that because she is a McCain supporter, this week's issue is not a Jann Wenner-ordered hit job on McCain remains a, uh, ridiculous argument, because Reinstein almost certainly wasn't asked, "Could you whip together a Palin story please?" — she was told want slant to take.
This week's Us Weekly took aim at Sarah Palin, turning her maybe-controversies into full-blown scandals. The questioning over whether her fifth child is actually her grandchild; her husband's DUI; the investigation about the attempted firing of her former brother-in-law — all wrapped together it became Janice Min's "Babies, Lies & Scandal" cover. And taken with Us' prO-bama cover, as well as owner Jann Wenner's donations to the Obama campaign and his repeatedly putting the Democratic candidate on the cover of Rolling Stone, it's easy to see this week's Us as yet another Wenner-orchestrated hit job on the GOP. Except it sooooo wasn't, Min insists. CONTINUED »
After leaving Jann Wenner's side as the publishing maestro's No. 2, Kent Brownridge went over to Maxim, after private equity firm Quadrangle bought it and Blender from Dennis Publishing, renamed its parent Alpha Media, and appointed Brownridge leader of the lad mags. Then, heh, he got sacked last month amidst investor unhappiness. But it's not like Brownridge is just going to comb over and play dead — he's got a new gig. Richard Desmond, he of the British publishing empire Northern Shell, hired Brownridge to lead his American tabloid OK!. So much trust Desmond has in Brownridge, he's having founding and sitting EIC Sarah Ivens and publisher Tom Morrissy begin reporting to him. But it's not just that Brownridge has found another last act that firms up his shock and awe campaign — it's that his gig at OK! means he's in direct competition with his former buddy Wenner, whose Obama-leaning media empire publishes the tabloid Us Weekly. And that is awesome. How to make this do-si-do even more interesting? Mr. Brownridge: Might we suggest you getting firmly behind a one John McCain?
Seeing what the National Enquirer did with John Edwards — endless press (eventually) and a slight, but noticeable, newsstand bump — Us Weekly is definitely not getting left behind with, or letting the Enquirer own, the latest political scandal. Or, you know, the scandal that might not really be a scandal, just a little matter of unwed teen pregnancy.
Enter Sarah Palin. Hitting this morning, this cover — which first broke on our own Queerty — "Babies, Lies & Scandal" slaps readers with the three things that are guaranteed to move a celebrity weekly from newsstand to readers' hands. (All that's missing? "Sex." But it's implied.)
Yes, Us is back on the political beat. But while it entered the fray with its well-sold Barack and Michelle Obama cover, that issue treated the wannabe future First Couple as genuine celebrities who should be celebrated.
This Palin cover, however, is "true" politics: sex! scandal! investigations! babies! cover ups! And it marks editor Janice Min's first real foray into the skankier side of politics.
But while Us is a magazine dedicated to pointing out Mary-Kate's fashion foibles and chronicling the girlfriends of Michael Phelps, Us is no stranger to touting scandal on its cover.
It's just that usually the type of sordid tale Us traffics in involves women named Lindsay Lohan or Jennifer Aniston, not the possible second-in-command of the nation. Nor is the word "abortion" ever mentioned. Nor do the first photos of a celebrity's baby — ahem, Halle Berry — get pushed to the sidebar.
Fox News is back to its anti-trans ways!
The network garnered some queer criticism earlier this year after trash talking trans man Thomas Beatie.
Now anchor Gregg Jarrett and US Magazine editor-at-large Ian Drew take a few shots at Isis, America's Next Top Model's new trans model. Our favorite part comes when Drew calls Isis' inclusion as a ratings grab and a television trend. Jarrett, of course, is flabbergasted by "him or her."
Facebook troller Janice Min tried describing her Us Weekly readership — who, for the record, earn more than the average Vogue reader — for the young, skinny smarties that they are, because this is her one genuine talking point when it comes to defending the piece of celebrity journascam that is her magazine. "We proved that celebrity-magazine readers were not obese women who spent all day watching TV and smoking cigarettes. They are young and well-educated. They want a magazine that gives them a fun break from work and family responsibilities." Of course, that got turned into Min's hatred of the obese. And, while we're at it, it's clear she hates old people who only have GEDs and enjoy their TiVos.
Now that he's exhausted all avenues of publicity — namely, Good Morning America and Chelsea Lately — Christopher Ciccone is taking his book tour to the web. As if there aren't enough places on the information superhighway trashing Madonna, Ciccone's started a blog to add to the fray where, he says, some of the material that lawyers kept out of the book appears. Which means you will find tales of Madonna pooping herself and Madonna sucking a guy off while the guy blows Christopher. Lawyers indeed!
But our favorite part of Ciccone's blogging so far? Madonna whining, in August 1993, about a savage Us Weekly article. CONTINUED »
Editorial Director
