Daily Dose Of Fantasy

On Thursday, the New York Times published an article addressing that Angelina Jolie has an “editorial plan” to sell only her best image to the press by handling her publicity carefully and all by herself, without a publicist. The article refers to one of her recent deals with People magazine which traded her twins photo with a sum of money less that seeking and featuring her philanthropist self into the interview instead:
“Ms. Jolie showed her skill at handling the news media in other negotiations. People magazine bid successfully for photos and an exclusive interview after she gave birth to her first child in 2006. Those pictures sold for an estimated $4.1 million, a sum that she and Mr. Pitt said they donated to charity.”

“The resulting package in its Aug. 18 issue — the magazine’s best-selling in seven years — was a publicity coup for Ms. Jolie, the Oscar winner and former Hollywood eccentric who wore a necklace ornamented with dried blood and talked about her fondness for knives before transforming herself into a philanthropist, United Nations good-will ambassador and devoted mother of six. In the People interview, there were questions about her and Mr. Pitt’s charity work and no use of the word “Brangelina,” the tabloid amalgamation of their names, which irks the couple.”

Today the chief-editor of People magazine wasted no time, releasing the following statement in response to the 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.”

Similar Posts:

• Angelina Jolie On InStyle
• Angelina Jolie Talks Twins, Movie, Obama, And Twins
• Brad Pitt In Rolling Stone: Angelina Is A Badass

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!