Angelina And Brad's Deal With People Mag: Baby Photos For Positive Coverage

New York Times:

LOS ANGELES - When Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt negotiated with People and other celebrity magazines this summer for photos of their newborn twins and an interview, the stars were seeking more than the estimated $14 million they received from the deal. They also wanted a hefty slice of journalistic input -- a promise that the winning magazine's coverage would be positive, not merely in that instance but into the future.

According to the deal offered by Ms. Jolie, the winning magazine was obliged to offer coverage that would not reflect negatively on her or her family, according to two people with knowledge of the bidding who were granted anonymity because the talks were confidential. The deal also asked for an "editorial plan" providing a road map of the layout, these people say.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[kloew]

What The New York Times piece left out is that Time Inc. not only covers People, but also Time Mag, CNN and TMZ. They get glowing coverage in all of those media outlets. In fact, they never appear on TMZ while Jennifer Aniston gets trashed there every single day. I wonder if that's part of their contract too to make her look bad. Btw, to use charity work as a form of damage control to distract people from an affair and bad publicity surrounding the Brad/Jen thing is absolutely immoral. No wonder they ran to an orphanage days after getting caught on that beach in Africa having that relationship they swore they weren't having. Shame on them!

[lioness39]

Thank you!

[Hechizera]

Oh puh-leeeze. Aniston doesn't need Angelina's or anyone else's help in making her look bad. She manages that very nicely all by herself with all her whining and refusing to accept any responsibility for her failures. Put that tired, washed-up sitcom hag on a one-way boat to Siberia and have done with it already.

[missjabez]

Why the pathological hatred of Jennifer Aniston? What has she ever done to you?

[happycat]

I just read this little "gem" of yours. I can only conclude one thing after reading it. You are screaming out for help. Please get some! If you do not have mental issues, then you are an extremely mean person.

[JScott]

Why single them out. I'm sure there are lotsa celebs who do the same thing. And I'll bet those 'candid' shots are probably less candid than believed. Besides all those celebs passing thru LAX DON'T WHINE about it you know your're there for the publicity, we know you can easily get a private jet at the sw side of lax or leave via Van Nuys or Santa Monica airport and avoid the paparazzi completely.

[MrsPeel]

More like "Peephole" magazine.

[tomas0808]

That's lame. So if she stabs Brad during a fight they're supposed to report that he cut himself shaving? This is manipulation of the media (albeit schlock media) and it's no different from Fox News spin. People need to stop buying People magazine.

[hrhkat]

If you were brad pitt and she stabbed you, you would look like a complete pu ssy, and it would hurt your career, and probably help hers, so it would probably be brad who said he cut himself shaving...

[claptrapa]

seek help. You are embittered and maddened by your hatred of a woman whose life I doubt you are a part of. I am referring to Ms. Aniston. Your posts exceed themselves in the smallness and meanness of spirit that invades them. As for the one I just addressed, this was a lame and childish response to tomaso808. You are very immature.

[shedances]

I would challenge Pitt & Jolie that the next time they agree to an interview (and hope for a decent viewership or readership, etc.), to consider talking not so much about themselves; but about the seriousness of being good parents in an increasingly complex & violent world.

And ...

Talk about helping all your children (esp. your now 7-year-old son, who should be in 2nd or 3rd grade by now ... ) with, say, a Science project or a vocabulary assignment ... instead of joking how your eldest spends time drawing images of war, etc.

Harp less about how little sleep you are getting & interruptions at night (we ALL get little sleep) ~ but rather, how you are going to address (future...) concerns/questions from your adopted children about identity & why their parents gave them up.

Enjoy your children (we ALL do!!!) ... but remember, it's not always a big party (or even a Lost Boys adventure).

As a rich family, you may not have issues with finances, too; so when you do decide to spend a ton of money on a birthday party & make it public, for example; remember that most have to "budget" for these things. But that doesn't mean it's any less important.

Finally ~ work on your own personal & past issues, in order to be healthy, esp. as your children reach adolescence years.

[lioness39]

You hit the nail on the head, shedances. Angelina and Brad speak of their children like they are one big picnic and they are playing mommy and daddy games.

[lioness39]

A happy Deja Vu to all.

[lioness39]

Wow! Another lead story on Brangelina from H u f f P. Meow!

[stillfresh]

$14 million for baby pics. $2 million in grants since '06. Give me a break.

[toocoldout]

Jealous much?

[godlessliberal]

The anger and bitterness of the author is palpable and I find it sad. "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." Why is it necessary for her to include old news about her and tie it to the person she is now? This "journalism" at its worst.

[shedances]

It's not a big deal. It's called a recap, or a celebrity's life 'in a nutshell' (often, only a paragraph or two). The media does this quite commonly for newer readers who may be unfamiliar with the individual's life/story, & for reference & also to summarize what was remarkable or unusual or well-known, etc. about this person (in other words, why is this person newsworthy or in the public spotlight?). Does that help you out abit?

[Isometric]

I agree, this is not the first time the NYT has written a similarly toned article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/movies/22back.html

[missjabez]

While the 2007 piece might be somewhat catty, Angelina is not an easy person to like. I think her big mistake was trying to portray herself as a humanitarian extraordinaire after she got bad publicity for pursuing Brad Pitt while he was married. She doesn't come as sincere.

[andj]

obviously there is something wrong with the NYT - it cant possibly be Jolie

(to jolie fans - who are lacking intelligence and who were fooled by media tart - Im being sarcastic)

[toocoldout]

It's called jealousy. She is rich, beautiful, young & is worshipped like a saint.

[demfriend]

A lot of people don't like or put down the Bradand Angie couple and I understand we all have our own ideas of what we believe about celeb's but I challenge those who speak/write/talk negative to do what these two have done with their celeb status and money. Rebuilding a part of New Orleans and continuing to call attention to the plight there while the US Gov has ignored them for years after Bush pledged to do everything to bring it back. Bush lied and we all know that but how many celeb's have done "something" to help? The kids organizations they pour money into that they either put it together or give money to help kids around the world can you match or do that? Angie gives a portion of her monies made to these kids, a very large portion. Between them they have adopted and have kids from all over which has encouraged some to adopt from other places in the world. It might sound like I am a true fan but I don't like all of their movies just a few and I do believe they are good people underneath the celeb skin.

[Damaven]

I wish I had written it first because those are my thought, exactly. Thank you.

[shedances]

The researcher in me would immediately reply .... there's nothing wrong with a healthy scepticism on any subject.

But I have to add as a personal note: contrary to how you're grouping Angie & Brad with everything else ... it IS possible, at least in my perspective, to separate out the man and the woman from their film work & acting endeavors, and also from charities and other decisions they've made, such as children in the public spotlight.

Also, your comment touches upon a good recurring question from various blogs; that being ~ are the only voices considered valid here, the ones that support people you & others like (i.e., the positive side of Hollywood celebrities Angelina Jolie & Brad Pitt)?

[amistad]

researcher, wouldn't that negate your argument as well?

[Isometric]

Wow seriously.

She's been doing her UN work for almost 9 years now, all the waaaaaaaaay back in 2001; waaaaaaaaaay before she met Brad Pitt. I also don't know what the article is getting at either. If she had as much control as they she does, her image wouldn't be so maligned as it is today. Just look at these comments at HuffPo.

There is no doubt she is a talented actress (her performance in Gia and George Wallace was amazing). People who can't see the talent have to stop reading the tabloids. It's pretty easy to avoid reading or hearing about her in the media if your not INTERESTED.

Second, I think its dishonest for anyone to question their parental abilities unless you live in their home. Saying their horrible parents? Based on what? Tabloids? It only shows your vendetta against the couple.

Third, to think that she's the only one who does this in Hollywood is just being naive. She's just getting flack for it because a publicist isn't doing it for her. The NYT was right, she is smart; why pay publicists millions of dollars when you can do it yourself?

[shedances]

I disagree. Read up on non-tabloid material (yes, the old fashioned library) regarding ways in which a celebrity markets their causes (e.g., Cause Marketing) & their public image. It's enlightening! Thanks.

[shedances]

Also ...

No one has said that they're 'horrible' parents, as you put it.

What people are saying ~ & have said ~ is that they don't like some of what Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie are saying publicly &/or doing, in terms of raising kids while also seeking public/media support & adoration (if you will).

In other words, Jolie's & Brad Pitt's chosen way of doing things doesn't necessarily jive with everyone else's "values" or beliefs on what it means to be well-adjusted parents in our shared society (whether it be Los Angeles or Cleveland or Kenya, etc.) ... an important discussion area, BTW, when it comes to those of us who do challenge ourselves constantly to be better & more capable human beings & parents to our own kids.

[shedances]

Another point to consider:

Just when things could've settled down (post twin births) somewhat for this unarguably non-conventional family ... Pitt decides to become a (self-made) lifestyle photographer, selling his work of his breastfeeding, larger-than-life partner to W. magazine.

You know, Pitt could've, instead, vigilantly maintained his family's & partner's privacy at this point by instead doing a private family photo album for his children & grandchildren to later cherish. But he chose a more public course.

Why would Brad do that ~ & why would Angelina Jolie agree to it ~ if they really truly wanted to be a normal, healthy, keep-to-themselves type family? I mean, other celebrities successfully maintain their children's privacy as much as possible. Why not Pitt & Jolie?

[curly2]

Because they would like to have it both ways-- saying "please value our children's privacy" while simultaneously selling photos of Jolie nursing.

[jaslyn]

These are ACTORS people. Yes they do good for charity and they have enough dough to do so, so good for them. HOWEVER, let's keep them in perspective. They're pretty to look at, but if you've ever seen either one of them interviewed, well, let's just say there are more interesting people to spend time with.

[shedances]

I'd add ~ actors & actresses whose lives are a continuing on-air, off-air drama {by their own making} ... & who are struggling to become part of the current world, community of normal, loving down-to-earth parents. I wish Jolie & Pitt luck. It won't be easy for them!

[scorpioleidy]

They are THE most beautiful hollywood couple & family ... eat your heart out, Jennifer Alone-iston.
VIVA BRANGELINA!

[andj]

viva bradgeloonies

[cooperone]

So when does Angie go back to wearing viles of blood around her neck? They both make me sick!

I have a difficult time imagining them as Parents of the Year!

[shedances]

That's certainly debatable, scorpiolady ~ & I think you might be buying too much into the fairy tale picture that Angelina Jolie & Brad Pitt are trying to 'package' for everyone (including themselves). Angie Jolie's not Snow White with a house of dwarves to take care of. And Brad Pitt's not a Prince Charming. They are simply human beings & they don't have superior DNA/genes compared with you or me or anyone else on this planet we all call home. Moreover ... their lives (for better or worse) ~ especially arguably Angelina's ~ are unfolding like a Shakespearean drama, rather than a fairy tale.

Thanks.

[missjabez]

Brangelina and their brood remind me of The Addams Family.

[missjabez]

There's nothing wrong with being a Brangelina fan, but why do you always have to bring Jennifer Aniston into the mix? What the hell has Jennifer Aniston ever done to you?

[marymansour]

Aniston seems to be a fetish and part of the service with the Brangelites. As if the presence of Jennifer validates their faux goddess, AJ.

[shedances]

I guess they expect Jennifer Aniston to bend over backwards for the woman who deliberately inteferred in this marriage ... it's commonly referred to as, being someone's willing doormat!

[andj]

Obviously you are a bradgeloonie who fell for her manipulation.

Now what has Aniston got to do with this story? Is angelina nothing without Aniston?

Your comment indicates that you are a bradgeloonie simply because you hate aniston?

[marymansour]

I don't believe for one minute that Jolie is without a publicist. All the names mentioned in that article are used as publicists even if not named as such. Jolie has proven in the last few years that she is adept at manipulating the media. She has blown smoke over the fact of her - for want of a better word - 'rocky' past. She has convinced the media that she is now a saint with voluptuous lips. Apparently her worshippers buy this BS lock, stock and barrel.

[andj]

she got a publicist after she stuck her tongue down her brothers throat

[shedances]

Mary ~ I'm sure that Angelina Jolie has many PR people involved in maintaining, as best they can, both her public & personal images. And of course, the same with actor Brad Pitt. Still, people do find things they don't like or agree with in Angelina (myself included in this group), including how she moves from an image as a 'boy or male toy' or 'goth maiden' to that of 'heavenly mother' (lol). I think Jolie's constantly re-imaging herself, as life goes along ... because she doesn't really know herself all that well, or she doesn't like what she was in years past. I also think she is also perhaps very desperate to relate to normal women/mothers on this Earth. I don't know why, though (it just seems apparent from her interviews & speech, etc.).

[jaslyn]

They bought Palin didn't they?