Intro for May 14, 2013
An op-ed in The New York Times > a cheesy PEOPLE Magazine cover, non? As you’d expect, there really is only one story today...
It’s an inspiring, courageous story. But how to cover it editorially? Do you report it straight, resist the urge to snark and snide and speculate...about any possible triangle retaliation or, for that matter, zombie movie leverage? Or is that just part of the conversation on celebrity and strategy ...which is... what we do here? As I have said many, many times before, no one controls her brand better than She does. She doesn’t even need a name here and you know, you knew before you even came here who She is. The decision to go with the NYT is not only savvy, at this point, it was expected. Because that’s how She’s evolved her image. She has the gravitas now, and few celebrities do, to make this kind of announcement in the American Newspaper of Record.
Newspaper of Record -- does that distinction still carry the same weight it used to? The internet has undeniably changed journalism. But there is still a certain prestige that comes from a report that originates in a Newspaper of Record, and certainly as it relates to perception. Consider too that it has to go both ways. It’s not just that She chose the Newspaper of Record as her preferred outlet of communication but also that the Newspaper of Record agreed that it was the appropriate outlet for her to communicate her message. If She was *just* another movie star, and not the movie star/humanitarian/crusader/hot sh-t of everything/mother angel that She is, the NYT may not have even taken it.
Much more on this to follow.
And then we’ll get to the other entertainment news, even though, as it always is whenever She’s around, everyone else kinda seems a lot less interesting.
Yours in gossip,