<![CDATA[Gawker: larry hackett]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: larry hackett]]> http://gawker.com/tag/larryhackett http://gawker.com/tag/larryhackett <![CDATA[Caroline Kennedy Going On SNL?]]> 83076308.jpgStarbucks jobs are now reserved for Yale grads; the rest of us have to try and obtain menial but absurd positions with Kanye West.

  • Lorne Michaels bought dinner for, and had an intense conversation with, Caroline Kennedy. Which means she's probably going on Saturday Night Live, contingent upon Fred Armisen doing that David Paterson impersonation the governor hates so much.
  • Kennedy, meanwhile, rushed to pay six years worth of overdue state bar fees. Which explains why Michaels picked up the tab for dinners. [Gatecrasher]
  • Kanye West hired someone to clean and photographically catalog his 450 shoes. In a down economy. Just imagine the sort of household servant jobs he cut. [Ask Men]
  • Thanks to a move by top editor Larry Hackett, People's LA bureau chief is no longer in charge of the LA bureau. [P6]
  • Guy Ritchie was flirting with various women at Soho House. Jude Law was his wingman. Uh, good luck, buddy. [Gatecrasher]
  • Chris Buckley will be this year's commencement speaker at Yale. He plans to teach them "how to get a job at Starbucks," as a sort of joke, you see. By the the time the speech is actually delivered this summer, of course, it will have been reworked as practical advice. [P6]
  • HBO may soon make a series about the plight of Ellen Barkin, whose $80 million windfall divorce from Ron Perelman was so traumatizing she still throws things at him when she runs into him at a restaurant. [P6]
]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5142642&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[People's Brangelina Pics Free of Puff-Piece Promise]]> Did People cut a sneaky deal with Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt to get photos of the couple's newborn twins? Absolutely yes, the New York Times said last month. Today? Absolutely not, says the Times.

The newspaper hasn't retracted the story. But public editor Clark Hoyt, the paper's in-house media critic, delivered a scathing review, saying that reporter Brooks Barnes got the most basic fact wrong. Hoyt, after interviewing People editor Larry Hackett and various Jolie intermediaries, concludes that Jolie never even asked for an "editorial plan" promising favorable coverage when negotiating for photo rights — the key allegation in the Times piece. The only condition in the magazine's written contract to license the photos was that the interview be conducted by email. (Barnes told Hoyt that his anonymous sources stand by their version of the story.)

We always thought the Times piece oversold the editorial-plan angle. Why would any of the players involved put something like that in writing, when it's implicit? People editors never needed to promise favorable coverage; its cuddly Brangelina archive did the work for them. True, it's not as sexy as a backroom deal — but a more nuanced take on the workings of the celebrity-industrial complex might have spared Barnes the public ink-lashing.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5103808&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Celebrity Magazine Editors Aren't as Good at Controlling Their Press as Celebrities]]> Following the New York Times' non-bombshell "exposé" about how Angelina Jolie expertly controls her image and weaseled People magazine into only running good coverage on her and her family, People fired back denying everything. And, yawn, now the whole non-issue has carried over to Washington Post sadsack Howard Kurtz's CNN show Reliable Sources. Kurtz spoke with people like an Extra junket correspondent who basically said what we all knew: that every celebrity blurb is heavily padded and protected and handled. Duh. Let's not treat frigging press junkets like some serious journalistic endeavor. They are the exact opposite. People editor Larry Hackett was on too, and he made only one thing clear:

His magazine, big national popular Time Inc. owned thing that it is, can't handle its press as well as lil' old Angelina Jolie. The Times piece was basically an unveiling of celebrity glossy coverage policy that everyone knew already. People is always nice to everyone. Booooring. But all they gave was one little comment denying the thrust of the article. Jolie should teach a class at the Learning Annex. "How to Leverage Your Coverage" or something. Hackett could learn a thing or two.

The whole RS segment is embedded below and is kind of silly except for two things: First, fun archival footage of a CNN Angelina Jolie interview where she raps an interviewer on the knuckles for asking about her rumored pregnancy. And second, Kurtz calling Jolie "the wild, slutty wife of Billy Bob Thornton."

Wild and slutty, baby. Wild and slutty.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5100116&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[The issue of People with Paris Hilton on...]]> The issue of People with Paris Hilton on the cover sold more than 1.5 million copies at the newsstand and, reportedly, was one of the magazine's top 10 sellers so far this year. If that's true, then People executive editor Larry Hackett sure does sound tepid about it: "I'm pleased. It came in right where it was supposed to be." [WWD]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=275584&view=rss&microfeed=true