I'm just responding to Liz's question re where the responsibility lies. Not really interested in having a go specifically at KP.
Although her columns do target different women.. on a weekly basis... Lady gaga, Kelly Brook, Madonna, etc... Even Mums who take maternity leave... its a complete b!tchfest !
Perhaps KP should take note of your pearl of wisdom and stop attacking and insulting other women.... and using twitter in the same way... then people like me would have nothing to say on the matter!
Yes I did Sam, thank you. It's a positive and a negative I thought. I could have put loads of links from readers reviews, which on the whole were very positive. But wouldn't want to give the impression of being biased, would we
Although her columns do target different women.. on a weekly basis... Lady gaga, Kelly Brook, Madonna, etc... Even Mums who take maternity leave...
Perhaps KP should take note of your pearl of wisdom and stop attacking and insulting other women.... and using twitter in the same way... the people like me would have nothing to say on the matter!
Perhaps KP should take note of your pearl of wisdom and stop attacking and insulting other women.... and using twitter in the same way... then people like me would have nothing to say on the matter!
Although her columns do target different women.. on a weekly basis... Lady gaga, Kelly Brook, Madonna, etc... Even Mums who take maternity leave... its a complete b!tchfest !
Perhaps KP should take note of your pearl of wisdom and stop attacking and insulting other women.... and using twitter in the same way... then people like me would have nothing to say on the matter!
:cool:
IMO KP will never stop attacking and insulting other women it is her way of getting attention. She seems so desperate for attention good bad or otherwise!
'Not really interested in having a go specifically'.
If KP didn't have 'a go' at people using her column and twitter, then she wouldn't come across as a nasty bitter witch... and people like me would have nothing to say about the matter... dam she might even be likeable...
I just think its ironic some people are happy to see her dish it out, but seem unhappy when people form a negative opinion based on that!
She is the queen of mean .... and in my opinion this alienates herself from the public.. and makes her look like a hypocrite.
I did chuckle when KP criticised Lady Gagas dress sense... I mean... for someone who dressed as a pregnant pink dildo for her entry for a song for the Eurovision contest...
My little pony to sell her tat... the lips costume that resembled a vagina....
words fail me!!!
I miss janna,brilliant and funny poster,it's quiet around here with out her.............Anyway,back on topic,katie price,,,And the slagging off of victoria,lady gaga and madonna,how much would she have liked a comeback and her name mentioned by anyone of these very popular A-listers..It's what every desperate z-lister dreams about,too bad for katie they didn't take the bait.
Just to be clear, I don't care what level of input they have, if they're being paid for it and their name/image appears alongside/attached to it, then it's their column. By putting their names to it, they're claiming ownership.
I agree. I think the truth is the journalist just writes in their style (and yes, in KP's case, a few catty comments about other celebs) and i doubt she even see's all of them - probably someone else from her side or nobody at all. I don't believe she does the column with a dictaphone - i think we saw from Pete's "My Life" a journo phoned him and just asked him for a comment - but i'd think sometimes the celeb isn't involved at all.
But yes, if they have taken the cash and allowed their name to be used or someone else to write it then I agree they should be held responsible.
Aw I'm disappointed Cyril I was just developing YOUR idea that 'Katie Price' is a character she's created for the benefit of the press and suggesting that as her team have become so proficient at portraying her alter ego she could put her feet up at home and live off the royalties. And I'm sorry but a lot of posters DO find her staged love life repetitive - the first date at Thorpe Park, :yawn: 'he's sooo good with the kids', ' 'he's the one' 'he could be my next baby daddy' :yawn: right through the break up [add your own clichés here] :sleep: - just change the name, photos and dates and the press articles are virtually interchangeable.
I agree. I think the truth is the journalist just writes in their style (and yes, in KP's case, a few catty comments about other celebs) and i doubt she even see's all of them - probably someone else from her side or nobody at all. I don't believe she does the column with a dictaphone - i think we saw from Pete's "My Life" a journo phoned him and just asked him for a comment - but i'd think sometimes the celeb isn't involved at all.
But yes, if they have taken the cash and allowed their name to be used or someone else to write it then I agree they should be held responsible.
Actually Cyril, in the KP/PA context, I think they do have a fair bit of input/control. In KP's case, it's her current sole means of a regular media profile, she promotes it on twitter and invites people to read it, and with PA, CAN has complete control over all CAN client content. That's what it says on the CAN tin.
What I dislike is the cherry picking, the credit when it's something 'good' and the excuses when it's something 'bad'. Either or.
Actually Cyril, in the KP/PA context, I think they do have a fair bit of input/control. In KP's case, it's her current sole means of a regular media profile, she promotes it on twitter and invites people to read it, and with PA, CAN has complete control over all CAN client content. That's what it says on the CAN tin.
What I dislike is the cherry picking, the credit when it's something 'good' and the excuses when it's something 'bad'. Either or.
Actually lexi, I've wondered whether the mags ask/tell the celebs who write columns (or, rather, their ghostwriters) to slag off other people, as such things are inevitably reported elsewhere which gets publicity for the mag in question.
KP does seem to do it the most but she's not the only zeleb "columnist" who slags people off. It's not quite as openly rude, but from what I understand, PA seems to be always having a high-handed finger wag at some celeb who's committed some perceived misdemeanour. I'm sure Chantelle and the numerous interchangeable WAGs who have columns do it, too.
Actually Cyril, in the KP/PA context, I think they do have a fair bit of input/control. In KP's case, it's her current sole means of a regular media profile, she promotes it on twitter and invites people to read it, and with PA, CAN has complete control over all CAN client content. That's what it says on the CAN tin.
What I dislike is the cherry picking, the credit when it's something 'good' and the excuses when it's something 'bad'. Either or.
I get you.
I think they would certainly have final copy approval.
But it was pretty clear from that clip of PA he doesn't write it (unless that was an isolated incident) - though i guess they can probably dip in or out as much as they want or schedule allows. Maybe with KP being her sole thing she might want involvement but then i'd question how the columns were carrying on when she'd just had the baby , visiting hospitals and being abroad etc. Unless she really made the time for it!
Actually lexi, I've wondered whether the mags ask/tell the celebs who write columns (or, rather, their ghostwriters) to slag off other people, as such things are inevitably reported elsewhere which gets publicity for the mag in question.
KP does seem to do it the most but she's not the only zeleb "columnist" who slags people off. It's not quite as openly rude, but from what I understand, PA seems to be always having a high-handed finger wag at some celeb who's committed some perceived misdemeanour. I'm sure Chantelle and the numerous interchangeable WAGs who have columns do it, too.
Agree with all this, Kat. Of course the mags/rags thrive on the 'controversy'. It's a symbiotic relationship. And as you say, KP is far from being the only one to do it.
The only point I was trying to make really is that we can't have it both ways, praising someone when they say something useful, and then claiming it's not their fault when they say something moronic, and vice versa.
Hello NOW people *waves* yes I'm one of those horrible online trolls that have put two and two together datewise and made "who's the Daddy"!!
Don't leave HEAT out *waves* - reading forums seems to be what passes for investigative journalism at the moment. They both take Katie's giving birth at 32 weeks as being gospel truth which they say proves we can't add up, conveniently forgetting it would also show her failure to add up correctly throughout the pregnancy.
Don't leave HEAT out *waves* - reading forums seems to be what passes for investigative journalism at the moment. They both take Katie's giving birth at 32 weeks as being gospel truth which they say proves we can't add up, conveniently forgetting it would also show her failure to add up correctly throughout the pregnancy.
Perhaps they should read the thread again! I don't believe that she gave birth at 32 weeks though... which would explain why there are no pictures of the baby...
I guess they are afraid of libel... but I wonder how many journalists have also done their addition and found that its a close call?
anyway... I guess I had better find a bridge to hide under!:D
Comments
I think THAT may well be the problem...:cool:
Although her columns do target different women.. on a weekly basis... Lady gaga, Kelly Brook, Madonna, etc... Even Mums who take maternity leave... its a complete b!tchfest !
Perhaps KP should take note of your pearl of wisdom and stop attacking and insulting other women.... and using twitter in the same way... then people like me would have nothing to say on the matter!
:cool:
Yes I did Sam, thank you. It's a positive and a negative I thought. I could have put loads of links from readers reviews, which on the whole were very positive. But wouldn't want to give the impression of being biased, would we
^^^
This!
I'm sorry, which pearl of wisdom?
IMO KP will never stop attacking and insulting other women it is her way of getting attention. She seems so desperate for attention good bad or otherwise!
'Not really interested in having a go specifically'.
If KP didn't have 'a go' at people using her column and twitter, then she wouldn't come across as a nasty bitter witch... and people like me would have nothing to say about the matter... dam she might even be likeable...
I just think its ironic some people are happy to see her dish it out, but seem unhappy when people form a negative opinion based on that!
She is the queen of mean .... and in my opinion this alienates herself from the public.. and makes her look like a hypocrite.
I did chuckle when KP criticised Lady Gagas dress sense... I mean... for someone who dressed as a pregnant pink dildo for her entry for a song for the Eurovision contest...
My little pony to sell her tat... the lips costume that resembled a vagina....
words fail me!!!
Yes! I miss janna and BB.
I miss them too!
And so very much in demand? Genuine question where ?
THIS !
I agree. I think the truth is the journalist just writes in their style (and yes, in KP's case, a few catty comments about other celebs) and i doubt she even see's all of them - probably someone else from her side or nobody at all. I don't believe she does the column with a dictaphone - i think we saw from Pete's "My Life" a journo phoned him and just asked him for a comment - but i'd think sometimes the celeb isn't involved at all.
But yes, if they have taken the cash and allowed their name to be used or someone else to write it then I agree they should be held responsible.
Aw I'm disappointed Cyril
Actually Cyril, in the KP/PA context, I think they do have a fair bit of input/control. In KP's case, it's her current sole means of a regular media profile, she promotes it on twitter and invites people to read it, and with PA, CAN has complete control over all CAN client content. That's what it says on the CAN tin.
What I dislike is the cherry picking, the credit when it's something 'good' and the excuses when it's something 'bad'. Either or.
Actually lexi, I've wondered whether the mags ask/tell the celebs who write columns (or, rather, their ghostwriters) to slag off other people, as such things are inevitably reported elsewhere which gets publicity for the mag in question.
KP does seem to do it the most but she's not the only zeleb "columnist" who slags people off. It's not quite as openly rude, but from what I understand, PA seems to be always having a high-handed finger wag at some celeb who's committed some perceived misdemeanour. I'm sure Chantelle and the numerous interchangeable WAGs who have columns do it, too.
Hello NOW people *waves* yes I'm one of those horrible online trolls that have put two and two together datewise and made "who's the Daddy"!!
I get you.
I think they would certainly have final copy approval.
But it was pretty clear from that clip of PA he doesn't write it (unless that was an isolated incident) - though i guess they can probably dip in or out as much as they want or schedule allows. Maybe with KP being her sole thing she might want involvement but then i'd question how the columns were carrying on when she'd just had the baby , visiting hospitals and being abroad etc. Unless she really made the time for it!
I agree about the cherry picking.
Agree with all this, Kat. Of course the mags/rags thrive on the 'controversy'. It's a symbiotic relationship. And as you say, KP is far from being the only one to do it.
The only point I was trying to make really is that we can't have it both ways, praising someone when they say something useful, and then claiming it's not their fault when they say something moronic, and vice versa.
Don't leave HEAT out *waves* - reading forums seems to be what passes for investigative journalism at the moment. They both take Katie's giving birth at 32 weeks as being gospel truth which they say proves we can't add up, conveniently forgetting it would also show her failure to add up correctly throughout the pregnancy.
Perhaps they should read the thread again! I don't believe that she gave birth at 32 weeks though... which would explain why there are no pictures of the baby...
I guess they are afraid of libel... but I wonder how many journalists have also done their addition and found that its a close call?
anyway... I guess I had better find a bridge to hide under!:D