Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Thanks For The Laughs OK!

As you can see by the photo above, OK! Magazine is really going for the gold by just coming out with every Jennifer Aniston cliche they can find and putting it all in one issue. You have her birthday, her getting married, her being over Brad Pitt, and of course having a baby. All of this is going to happen this year. The only thing they don't mention is how she and Courteney Cox are going in for surgery together to be conjoined at the hip.

I love how on the cover they say it is a World Exclusive like John and Jen actually sat down for an interview with the magazine and revealed all of this to them. The only thing exclusive about is that the other weekly tabloids went with other stories this week so the cliches and rumors about Jen and John are exclusively the domain of OK! for this week. Next week some other tabloid will have the exclusive.

For some reason, whenever I read phrases like that, it really ticks me off. I'm not stupid, and neither are you, but I hate the fact that basically OK! is lying to people in an effort to convince them to buy their magazine. When the average person sees that cover photo and the whole World Exclusive thing, they are being induced to buy it because they believe that Jen and John are speaking. They are not, and for some reason it is one of my biggest pet peeves. Another pet peeve is when magazines use quotes which are nothing more than double speak. This is my favorite quote from the article.

"It wouldn't be much of a surprise to anybody if they moved in together before years end," a friend of Jen tells OK!. "And if they do, you can bet there will be serious discussions about having children."

Well first of all the cover promised me a wedding not living together, so where the f**k did this come from? When the average person reads this they will probably read it quickly and will just assume that Jen & John are moving in together and will be having children. Unfortunately it says neither of those things. It is a bunch of ifs and for some reason I just feel like the tabloids are preying on people and getting them to believe this garbage. I like gossip. Hell I love gossip and speculation but come out and say something speculative or make a guess. Don't be wishy washy. The quote above is exactly what any politician says when they are running for office. There are words there but there are no promises and no guarantees. It allows for modification if something goes astray.

Take a guess and be wrong. Who the hell cares if you are wrong. No one will remember it anyway, but at least you took a stand and said something. It isn't like you are going to get sued for anyone if you say that Jen is going to get married. Why the hell should she care.

Take that quote and say something like, "John and Jen are moving in together by the end of the year. Neither Jennifer or John has really ever looked or acted as if they even enjoy kids, so they probably won't be having any unless it is an accident."

Wrong? Well probably on the first part, but who cares. It is better than the drivel they are trying to pass off as gossip. As to the second part, it presents a discussion topic around the water cooler.


Kat said...

Magazines like these should be sued until they're forced to go under. Every time I see one of those ridiculous rags in the checkout line, I wonder what sort of desperate, deluded individual would buy them and believe what they're reading. The cover of this one has such specific 'details' about the 'wedding' that it would be impossible for the publication to deny that they are lying. They should be sued until their eyes bleed, not because I have some deep-seated affection for either of the parties involved, but because magazines like this make money off of lying to people. A little like me running around with a sandwich board with a slogan like 'Kate Hudson was born a man! Now gimme money."

I like my snark and gossip to be rooted in something other than sloppy, unimaginative schoolyard tale-telling, but that's just me.

Unknown said...

Well, I knew it was bullshit when they mentioned Vera Wang wedding gown. I thought Vera was out? Who's the new IT wedding gown designer.... Monique Lhuillier?

"Finally Over Brad"... that must really stab.

Oh Shit! Courteney is Matron of Honor, not Maide of Honor. Does that mean she's an old queef? Sorry for the vulgarity... high dose of Michael K. today.

MISCH said...


mags said...

The mags are ridiculous. Weren't these the same headlines during the VV/JA relationship?


I don't think this is the last time or relationship we'll be seeing these exact same headlines.

lutefisk said...

I think when Debbie Reynolds was dumped by Eddie Fisher for Liz Taylor, she was much more graceful about it. She was also left with small children.
At this point I wouln't put it past Jennifer Aniston to actually pay OK for this article to steal some thunder away from the People issue, & promote her own film coming out. She appears too desparate.

and yes, I did feel sorry for her when she was dumped, but if it was a good marriage, they would still be married. Obviously something was missing there.

wood1107 said...

Remember, she and her publicist usually engage in a tit-for-tat with the Jolie-Pitts. The twin deities photos come out? Jen is engaged! Huvane quicky denies! Jolie announces her pregnancy at Cannes - suddenly the internets are deluged with photos of Jen in a bikini! Jen with John Mayer! Jen and her nips shopping, shopping, shopping!

It's her publicist's MO - news about the Jolie Pitts, then some fake story about her is sold to the tabs (with unusually high-res images for so-called 'candids'), and then is promptly denied. It's her way of trying to stay relevant. Silly rabbit.

Impertinent Vixen said...

Seriously. Star Magazine just reported JA was the woman in the car with Morgan Freeman AND launched that attack on the man on the bus in Canada. That woman gets around.

Unknown said...

What happened to that John Mayer quote when asked by a girl if he was in a relationship and replying "It's vague."

Naturally it's the war of the tabloids. One favors the Brangelunatics and the other favors JA.

califblondy said...

N.A.F.A., according to the Queen Mum, Debbie played the victim to the hilt when Eddie dumped her for Elizabeth. Mum has told me the story many times of how Debbie would wear worn out clothes and had something on once that was being held together with a safety pin. She'd have a kid on each hip for full effect.

Weren't the scandals so much better back in those days??

lutefisk said...

Calif--yes, the scandals were better then lol! I should rephrase what I meant to say--Debbie did play the part of the dumped wife for the most beautiful woman in the world, but she didn't make imaginary hook-ups, wedding plans, bikini photo-ops, etc.
I kind of meant that she was left with small kids, and may have milked that situation rightfully so, but not with these ludicrous stories that seem to plague Jen everytime the Brangelina's are in the spotlight.
And, she definitely had the public's sympathy. But, she was able to rise aboe it.

merrick said...

dont you see, this is exactly what the plan was .. to get and keep people talking about jen ... when all else fails, or when your ex has two adorable twins whose pics made photo history, money wise, sell some shit to the tabs and see your name and face in lights .. typical poor me jen behavior .. i can stand her .. does she really think jb is the marrying kind? only if you are serously into kink ..

Susan said...

Oh is Jennifer on that magazine, I never noticed. I was just going to buy it to make myself look better naked ......celebrity style

Judi said...

ITA with everyone above. OK pulled this lame a$$ stunt because they were pissed they didn't get the twin exclusive. It also tells the world that Janice Min is on Team Anniston. How long before Mayer cuts her loose? I'll guess before Halloween. What do you think?


Popular Posts from the last 30 days