Thecelebritycafe horoscope index

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Dan Castellaneta. Retrieved The Celebrity Cafe. Archived from the original on Or Bob Dylan And there's just a handful of them. Well, how good would they be if there were 2, of them? These markets still do not have a publishing deal in place. This only got resolved recently in the UK. This is the same for all labels and all artists.

US only. Also Live Streaming! A chat with Sean Wilentz. DylanRadio announces updates and podcast - Dylanradio from Scott Miller 6 - Want to hear perfect-sounding records? Last paragraph: Bob Dylan - Independent. Albert Lee, piano. Which albums should Bob perform live in their entirety?

The Beatles from moon j. Shopping references in their lyrics - Mtro Times from David R. Ane Brun - Evil Monito from moon j. The plan was to release an album of original Christmas songs. The Beatles from Alfred Jones, moon j. Norred - Country Standard Time from moon j. Dylan - Uncut from Scott Miller, moon j. Barnes 4 - not a leg to stand on On November 1, , I made a post to rec.

Here is the post at Google Groups, thanks to Dag Braathen for the link! A subheader or ultrashort summary that I can use, is also nice. Finally, sign the way you want me to credit you if it is different from what shows up in the From field. Vogt, Jr. More later today! Note his June motto. A few words about Bob Dylan.

No, and now on repeat, Mr. Just check croz. Tickets GBP6 on the door. Gimme Shelter - Uncut from moon j. Club from moon j. A Bob Dylan Christmas Album? Smith still amazed looking back at musicians he's met, performed with - Recordnet from Randall Johnston. Clinton 3 - Joan Baez SF Oct 16 release in Australia - bandit. One of the new releases under iTunes 9. Club from John Want a Ticket? Note that celebrity does not depend on age, gender, place of birth, talent, or skill, although these qualities may be more helpful to some people than to others.

Celebrity depends on the action taken by individuals, that is, how they use their talent, skills, age, gender, and so forth. Notice some of the verbs in the list of characteristics: work, accomplish, seek, connect. These require considerable effort and energy. Having youth and 31 32 Problems, Controversies, and Solutions talent will not get you very far unless you do something with that youth and talent. If one accepts the six characteristics as determining celebrity, it becomes quickly obvious that not all those in public life are celebrities.

It is possible to have some, even most, of the traits and still fall short of celebrity. One can be famous and well known, but not a celebrity. One can have significant work accomplishments and still not be a celebrity. In short, our requirement that an individual meet all six characteristics makes becoming a celebrity more involved that one might expect. On the other hand, some people might feel that a list of qualities one must have to become a celebrity is too complicated, too analytical, too academic, too confusing.

Phone: 646-492-3101

If you were such a person, you might pose some interesting questions. Celebrity should not be any different. Why should other people make decisions about anything, including celebrity, I can make for myself? The argument is supported, to some degree, by the technological determinism theory, developed by Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian professor of culture and technology. Although McLuhan died in , his work remains a major influence in helping us understand popular media culture.

McLuhan believed that media technology determines how people think, feel, and act. In other words, the messages we receive through media are so influential in our lives that we are no longer aware that our feelings, ideas, and opinions are being shaped by technology and the messages it carries. Thus, technology is the determining factor, that is, the unstoppable, unavoidable authority in establishing how we perceive the world.

Not all scholars agree with McLuhan, but many do. In short, media exposure alone—because of technological determinism—is the definitive element in celebrity. This argument makes valid points about the power of the individual and the power of media. We are taught that our ideas, opinions, and choices do not hold absolute truth; others rightfully have different ideas and opinions and make different choices. Diversity is highly valued in contemporary multicultural society. Furthermore, we live in a media-rich culture of computers, smart phones, iPods; we blog, we tweet, and we upload to YouTube.

New media, particularly, are quite powerful. The conclusion to be drawn from these two arguments is, of course, a matter of individual choice. However, the stronger argument appears to be the one requiring celebrities to meet the six characteristics developed in Chapter 1. These qualities represent a set of standards, that is, a way of determining what a thing should be. If celebrities are role models or individuals the public holds in high esteem, they should meet some basic standards.

Life is full of standards. One cannot just arbitrarily do these sorts of things. There are criteria to be met. In a world where standards are firm for many of the things with which we have contact, we cannot abandon celebrity to the whim of the individual. Furthermore, celebrity would be too easy to achieve if it depended solely on the opinion of an individual.

Nothing worthwhile is easy. This brings to mind the movie A League of Their Own, a film about the first female professional baseball league in the s. The hard. When does celebrity end? The quick answer is that it ends when an individual fails to meet the six celebrity characteristics. At first glance, one would be tempted to say that celebrity ends 34 Problems, Controversies, and Solutions when an individual ceases to become highly visible in the media. Although Coleman died in late May , his later life provides a good example of how celebrity can slip away.

Coleman had financial problems for almost 20 years before he finally filed for bankruptcy in The few roles he got on television or in films were minor ones; for example, he played the pizza guy in the B-level film A Christmas Too Many. That was not enough for him to maintain celebrity status.

Were it not for his apparent suicide attempt and a charge of assault on a fan, he would have been entirely out of public view. In any case, he no longer had accomplishments of interest and importance to the public. He did not embody the dreams and desires of those young people who were fans of his television show. In short, he failed to meet several celebrity characteristics and was therefore considered a former celebrity.

We mean no disrespect to Coleman. He has a lot of company in the former-celebrity category. Willie Aames, another popular sitcom star in the late s and s Eight is Enough , has also fallen on hard times; he filed for bankruptcy in However, having money trouble is not the only way to lose celebrity status. In the Miss Teen USA pageant, South Carolina teen Caitlin Upton was an on-stage celebrity for perhaps an hour until she tried to answer a question about why a fifth of Americans are unable to locate the United States on a world map.

According to her Web site www. Most people would probably agree with the controversial part. She conspired with her ex-husband and two others to attack competitor Nancy Kerrigan at an Olympic practice session in Kerrigan was injured in the attack and did not place first in the Is Celebrity Finite? Harding and her ex-husband also appear in a sex tape, presumably made on their wedding night.

Aames, Hatch, Upton, Harding, and a host of others, once celebrities, now fail to meet several of the required characteristics. They are former celebrities. Although not common, a few individuals have chosen to leave the media spotlight and essentially abandon their celebrity. This was the case with Bobby Fischer. Fischer won the World Chess Championship in and then dropped from sight for almost 20 years. Fischer was quirky, cranky, and somewhat reclusive before the championship match, but the competition seemed to bring out his other negative qualities. He complained about first one thing, and then another, during the match.

He returned to competition briefly in by playing a match in Yugoslavia, but disappeared again for several years before moving to Iceland where he died in Fischer was the first American to win the World Chess Championship and could have capitalized on his celebrity, but he chose not to. Take Michael Jackson, for example. This Is It was well received by both critics and fans.

In short, death may remove celebrities from the media spotlight, but their work and their earning power may live on. Advancing age is also a factor in bringing celebrity to an end. Dozens of the famous and well known are over the age of 85 and, although still alive, have faded into the celebrity background. These and other elderly celebrities are rarely seen. To answer the question posed at the beginning of this section, yes, celebrity is finite. Celebrity has boundaries. Becoming a celebrity means meeting all six of our characteristics; the end of celebrity is less definite and includes factors, such as age, that are not part of the list of required celebrity qualities.

Celebrities Who Violate Social or Moral Norms A norm is a principle of correct action held by members of a society that guides, controls, or regulates behavior. Time was, men stood aside respectfully and held doors open so women could pass through first. This practice was considered entirely appropriate; failure to follow this norm was the epitome of rudeness.

Other women may simply not pay much attention to who goes through a door first. Nevertheless, norms still exist in contemporary society. What happens to a celebrity when the individual violates a social or moral norm? Although there are violations of social and moral norms in all areas of life, most high-profile violations for celebrities seem to occur in politics and entertainment.

Politicians are often not precise in their comments about pending legislation, government policies, the behavior of peers, or their own actions. This sometimes gets them into trouble because they violate a norm, that is, a standard of behavior expected of everyone. Take, for example, Rod Blagojevich who, in , was the governor of Illinois. We expect individuals to acquire jobs on merit; we expect those in public office to work for the common good, not their individual good. Our expectations are not always met, but they are worthy goals; we, as members of society, expect our leaders to behave properly.

In this case, Blagojevich ignored a host of norms: legal, political, social, and moral. The Illinois legislature apparently agreed with this assessment and removed him from office early in All confessed to their wrongdoing and offered apologies. Only Spitzer resigned his position.

It is safe to say that these men were diminished in the eyes of the public because they were unfaithful to their wives; adultery is still a serious violation of social norms in contemporary society. Whatever celebrity these men might have enjoyed as high-profile public office holders has slipped away.

Links to Other Sites

Although the media pay close attention to the negative things politicians do, they give even greater attention to the misdeeds of entertainment celebrities. But unlike politicians, celebrities who violate social or moral norms do not necessarily lose or diminish their celebrity.

Grammy awards are given for outstanding achievement in the music industry. On Grammy day in , Brown turned himself in to police and was booked on suspicion of making criminal threats. Further investigation revealed that his girlfriend Rihanna had bruises on her face as a result of an apparent early morning confrontation with Brown.

One report said Rihanna had been hospitalized as a result of the attack. Neither performer appeared at the Grammy ceremony Errico For her part, Rihanna also released an album in late Brown violated a social norm and appears to be less popular than before. The question here is whether this violation of social norms should have led to diminished celebrity. On the one hand, one could argue that no one is perfect and that humans make mistakes, especially when strong emotions are involved.


  • آموزش زبان انگلیسی (از مبتدي تا پيشرفته)?
  • eclipse january 1 astrology.
  • astrology solar eclipse january 25 2020.
  • capricorn astrology february 2020;
  • May 2007 Archives;

On the other, abuse of any sort violates contemporary social norms and should be punished. Professional football star Michael Vick went to prison for his role in promoting dog fights; our culture is not willing to ignore animal abuse. Are we willing to ignore the abuse of a girlfriend or boyfriend? What punishment, if any, should Brown be assessed as a result of his violation of a social norm?

In theory, Brown deserves some punishment, but in practice, the general public is not inclined to deal harshly with celebrity misbehavior. Remember that celebrities embody the dreams and desires of many members of the public.


  • virgo horoscope today january 22 2020.
  • Local Business Entries for Saint Rose?
  • february 8 horoscope name.
  • daily horoscope for december 5.
  • Today's Free Daily Horoscope.

We feel close to celebrities; many are role models. We resist making judgments that might destroy our relationship with them, however illusory. Other entertainment celebrities have violated social or moral norms, yet they, too, seem to have survived with most of their celebrity status intact. Paris Hilton had the advantage of being born into a well-known family. The Hilton family is both rich and famous, best known for its worldwide chain of hotels.

Paris considers herself a model, actress, singer, and fashion designer. She has her own line of fragrances. Others believe her to be a socialite, that is, an individual who is prominent due to social or financial status but who may have few real accomplishments. That assessment may be a bit harsh because Paris has some accomplishments. She appears regularly on television, both in the United States and elsewhere. Paris works hard and is willing to make personal appearances even in small venues.

But Paris has a history of violating social and moral norms. In , just before The Simple Life began its episode run on television, a sex tape involving her and then-boyfriend Rick Salomon began circulating on the World Wide Web. Public display of sexual activities violates social and moral norms; everyone knows humans are sexual beings, but intimate behavior should be private.

Hilton violated another social and moral and legal norm by driving with a suspended license. She was also sentenced to three years probation. Nevertheless, several months later she was stopped by police who discovered her license had been suspended. This landed her in jail. Reckless driving, driving while intoxicated, and driving with a suspended license violate social, moral, and legal norms. The public found these incidents somewhat entertaining but was disturbed that because she was a celebrity, Paris served less time in jail than she should have.

Any member of the general public would almost certainly have had to serve more than four days. Should celebrities be held to the same standards as common folk? Most members of the public would not get similar breaks in similar situations. There is a simple answer to the double standard question: everyone should be treated equally when it comes to violations of the law; social and moral norms are not as firmly established as laws and thus violations should be subject to more flexible treatment.

The double standard will continue primarily because, as everyone knows, the rich are different! So are celebrities! She sought and was awarded an injunction against the paparazzi; they must stay at least meters away from her London apartment. She was acquitted of assault charges lodged against her by a fan who said Winehouse punched her in the face. The celebrity gossip world promptly began buzzing about her apparent breast augmentation and her apparent new addiction— exercising. Determining the truth is hard here, obscured as it is by the hype and spin of her supporters and the delight some Web sites take in trashing her.


  1. scorpio horoscope rob brezsny?
  2. elle girl horoscope scorpio!
  3. are the zodiac signs leo and leo compatible.
  4. libra weekly horoscope 15 january 2020 michele knight.
  5. december 25 personality horoscope!
  6. Has Winehouse violated social or moral norms? Probably, but the public may have some sympathy for her; it is well known that alcohol abuse is a problem at every socioeconomic level of society. Your next-door neighbor or your cousin or your best friend could have a drinking problem. While no one likes to see another in a state of intoxication—or be on the receiving end of some drunken behavior—people tend not to condemn the person but to urge the individual to seek help.

    Is there a difference between the behaviors of Paris Hilton and Amy Winehouse? Yes, there is. Paris was essentially found to be driving under the influence DUI of alcohol, but is not known to be addicted to drink. Winehouse was addicted to it. Addiction is a serious problem worldwide. The public favors helping first, but stands ready to reassess its opinion if an individual either refuses help or returns to the addiction.

    The list of entertainment celebrities who have violated social or moral norms is a long one. Not all of them can be profiled here, but a few more will serve to illustrate the point. Actress Lindsey Lohan was given an extra year of probation by a judge who discovered she had failed to attend alcohol education classes for her two DUI convictions. Lohan explained she was out of the country working; the judge ordered her to get court approval before leaving town or face time in jail Gillin Nevertheless, Letterman confessed on-air to the affairs and apologized for his behavior.

    Navigation menu

    Ratings for the Late Show improved for a week or so, but settled to their former levels when the story disappeared from newspapers and entertainmentnews television programs. Neither Lohan nor Letterman appears to have diminished their celebrity status. We may be at the point in the culture where people just accept the fact that celebrities do these sorts of things and that celebrity social and moral norms are flexible. Often the best we can hope for is an apology and a return to normal life. The case of professional golfer Tiger Woods raises another issue regarding celebrities who run afoul of social and moral norms.

    Can celebrities choose when to make information about their lives public and when to keep information private? In other words, should celebrities be permitted to control their celebrity status, that is, seek recognition and respect for their work in the public sphere, but withdraw from the celebrity spotlight when it is convenient for them?

    The concept of privacy is important to most Americans. But the law also makes a distinction between public and private figures. Individuals in the public sphere are entitled to privacy but must understand that living a public life requires them to give up some of it. Celebrity depends to some degree on public opinion. Most ordinary citizens would call police if someone was lurking outside their home trying to snap a photo of them. Nevertheless, the degree of privacy to which one is entitled is an issue frequently argued 42 Problems, Controversies, and Solutions in court.

    On the Friday after Thanksgiving , at in the morning, Tiger Woods had a single car accident in his suburban Orlando neighborhood. He struck a fire hydrant and then rammed a nearby tree. Woods suffered cuts and bruises but no permanent injury. Woods, exercising his right under Florida law, refused to speak with law enforcement about the accident. The questions came quickly. Did Tiger and his wife have an argument?

    Did he leave the house in anger? Exactly how did he manage to hit both a hydrant and a tree and do considerable damage to his vehicle? Where was he going at that time of night? Tiger was silent for more than 48 hours. On the following Sunday afternoon, he posted a statement on his Web site.

    This explanation satisfied almost no one. It failed to answer any of the questions the public and the media had posed. During the next couple of days, rumors about possible extra-marital affairs and domestic violence began to swirl. This situation clearly illustrates a problem celebrities sometimes have. They may want to control or manage what the public knows about them.

    To some extent they can do this by being well behaved and having a good publicist, but their power is limited; celebrity, as we noted in Chapter 1, depends to a large extent on public opinion, often formed as a result of media coverage. Celebrities, as a rule, cannot control what media say about them or in what context media choose to feature them. Thus, celebrity control of a situation often ends when the television cameras roll. Nevertheless, Woods clearly violated a social norm: explaining the accident to law enforcement.

    Many people believe that if you have nothing to hide, why should you fear talking to police? Others might wonder whether a traffic citation would be issued if they talked. Is it best to talk or remain silent? The bad news is: Privacy? Are you kidding me? Woods remained silent. On Wednesday, US Weekly, a popular celebrity magazine, revealed that Woods would be featured in its December 14 issue. It should be noted here that until the time of the auto accident, Woods had a sterling reputation as a professional golfer, a husband and father, and a supporter of important charities.

    His failure to provide details about the accident would probably not have done much damage to his reputation; his celebrity would have remained intact. His violation of a social norm refusing to talk to police was a minor one and likely to be quickly forgiven or forgotten by the public. However, the information in the US Weekly story almost certainly damaged both his reputation and his celebrity status.

    The magazine reported that Woods had an on-going relationship with Jaimee Grubbs, a woman he met at a Las Vegas nightclub in Another report said that there may have been as many as text messages exchanged between Grubbs and Woods, although none of the texts was quoted. Almost 44 Problems, Controversies, and Solutions immediately after the US Weekly story broke, Woods made a public apology and appealed again for privacy.

    Although Woods received unqualified support from other sports figures, not everyone agreed that life would soon return to normal, he would continue to win golf tournaments, and his celebrity status would be as good as ever. The public expects an apology from those who have violated social and moral norms. Once an apology is given, reputations can be repaired. An apology goes a long way in helping one maintain celebrity status.

    Just a few days later, he had little control over the information about him. Woods seemed to blame the media for this. While celebrities have a great deal of authority and prestige, those who gave them prestige and authority cannot be ignored. An aggressive media and public opinion are powerful forces. This is the nature of celebrity in the 21st century.

    Entertainment Tonight LIVE: 2019 Celebrity Love/Career Horoscopes Celebrity Astrologer The Leo King

    Shortly thereafter, the sponsors for whom Woods does endorsements began to reassess their relationship with him. Public opinion polls Celebrity Endorsement 45 showed a significant decline in his popularity. These awards were based on his year-long golfing performance. Thus, Woods is still a celebrity but, in the minds of many, not the celebrity he was when we all sat down to dinner on Thanksgiving Day Woods and his wife divorced in late August We have seen that, overall, violating social and moral norms is frowned upon by the public, regardless of whether one is a politician, an entertainer, or active in some other profession.

    Celebrities can usually maintain their status by explaining what happened and apologizing for their inappropriate actions. The public is less forgiving, however, when celebrities violate a legal norm and are given special treatment because of their celebrity status. Nevertheless, celebrity rarely ends as a result of violating a social or moral norm.

    Celebrity Endorsement One of the most popular advertising techniques worldwide is to have a celebrity endorse a product. Celebrity endorsement is usually only a part, but an important part, of a larger product marketing campaign. In addition to being well known and famous, celebrities are attractive, likeable, and trustworthy—at least in the minds of the public to whom the advertising message is directed. Advertisers avoid celebrities, such as O. Simpson, who have negative reputations. However, very little research has been done on the issue of celebrity endorsement.

    Scholars have discovered only a few things of note. For example, an American celebrity endorsing a product in an advertisement broadcast in Austria was less effective in fostering an intent to purchase than a non-celebrity native spokesperson, making the country of origin COO an important factor in endorsement decisions Chao, Wuhrer, and Werani In a capitalistic society, it just makes sense to use celebrities to sell products or services.

    Capitalism has always made maximum use of the tools it has available to pursue profit. However, there are less-visible issues here that make celebrity endorsement problematic. The most obvious question that arises from celebrity endorsement is this one: What expertise does the celebrity endorser have? Returning to Tiger Woods, for a moment, could it be said that when he endorses Gatorade, he is an expert and thus qualified to make the endorsement? The consumer presumes so, given the fact that Gatorade was originally developed for and is regularly consumed by all types of athletes.

    Actress Jennifer Love Hewitt has appeared on behalf of Hanes lingerie. The implication is she wears the undergarments she is endorsing. But what about celebrities endorsing products with which they have no apparent expertise? Chrysler removed ads featuring singer Celine Dion after she failed to increase sales of the Chrysler Pacifica.

    The singer may have been seen as having little or no expertise in automobiles. Ultimately, the mode of endorsement may not mean as much as the credibility of the endorser. A highly credible and likeable celebrity could probably endorse a product in any of the aforementioned modes with positive results. A related issue involves ethics. Is it ethical for celebrities to endorse products they do not use or have no expertise in?

    As a rule, ethical behavior is expected of individuals, groups, and corporations in all walks of life. As a practical matter, however, people are willing to stretch this ethical rule, or perhaps ignore it altogether, if it is convenient for them or makes their lives easier. In traffic, some motorists regularly run red lights; in parking lots, some drivers park in fire lanes; in department stores, some shoppers return an article of clothing they purchased the previous day and wore the previous night; in the job market, some workers inflate their resumes—listing jobs they have not had or degrees they Fictional and Cartoon Celebrities 47 have not earned.

    After all, many argue, there is no clear right and wrong, no clear black and white; the world is gray. Relativists would say it is acceptable for celebrities to endorse products they do not use or have no connection to; absolutists would say the practice is not acceptable. The culture and the law have almost always given advertisers the freedom to advertise products in their most appealing light. For example, a fast-food hamburger advertisement on television might show the burger as a hot, juicy slab of beef, paired with a rich, red slice of tomato, and accompanied by a deep-green leaf of lettuce, all on a fresh bun.

    Yet consumers buy these sorts of burgers by the millions daily. Consumers do not require their burgers to match the ideal one they saw on television. This is welcome news to celebrities. They need not fear that the products they endorse will cast them in a negative light if those products do not perform as promised. With all due respect to the ethical absolutists, the relativists win here. Celebrity endorsements do little harm and are ethically acceptable to most consumers. Fictional and Cartoon Celebrities Must a celebrity be a real person?

    Up to this point, we have assumed so. However, a closer look at popular culture reveals some celebrities are not real people. Take, for example, Homer Simpson, the bumbling father on the highly rated animated television sitcom The Simpsons. Homer is so well known that some of his favorite utterances have made their way into regular human conversation.

    At special events, an individual who wears a Homer Simpson costume is popular with the younger set. No one cares to know the name of the person 48 Problems, Controversies, and Solutions wearing the costume; Homer is the celebrity. Homer Simpson is famous and well known, highly visible in the media, and seeks to maintain his status, but meets none of the other standards for being a celebrity.

    Other fictional characters have captured the attention of the public, or at least the younger segment of the public. Like some other fictional film or television stars, SpongeBob SquarePants has his own line of merchandise, such as pillows, bed linens, clothing, and backpacks. Individuals dressed as SpongeBob are popular wherever they go. Even some parents have been known to watch the SpongeBob program with their children. Although not written for children, the program is highly popular among younger viewers; however, many of them may not understand the program as satire.

    Should the celebrity label be applied to these and other cartoon characters? If the answer is yes, then a different list of celebrity characteristics must apply. As noted earlier, only three of our current celebrity characteristics fit fictional characters: being famous and well known, being highly visible in media, and seeking to maintain status.

    There seems to be no harm in this. Adults know the difference between a real and a fictional celebrity. Children need to be taught the difference between the real and the pretend world. Cartoons are a good place to start. Children should learn that cartoon characters can do things real people cannot, such as return from the dead for the next South Park episode or drink lots of beer as Homer Simpson does with no real consequences.

    Reality triumphs fiction. Therefore, celebrities must be real people. Some children do mimic what they see on television and viewing cartoon or other fictional characters as Source and Quality of Celebrity Information 49 celebrities can have tragic consequences. For example, a year-old Maryland boy committed suicide and left a note for his parents, telling them to watch South Park to learn why he took his life. The note specifically mentioned Kenny, the character who is killed in most episodes McManus Scholars are divided on the causal connection between media consumption and human behavior.

    However, not every cartoon or fictional character can qualify as a celebrity. To be considered a celebrity, the character must possess three of our celebrity characteristics: be famous and well known, be highly visible in media, and seek to maintain status.

    1996-08-29 - Henderson Home News

    An individual does not have to monitor all celebrity media, of course, to stay informed. Friends, family, and co-workers regularly pass on what they know or have heard about celebrities. It might be revealing to look at each celebrity medium with a view toward understanding what and how information is presented. That was followed by photos of couples: Hillary Swank and her new boyfriend, George Clooney and his new girlfriend, Jack Black and his wife, and Britney Spears and her new boyfriend.

    Each of the photos had either a short caption of explanation or a slightly longer sidebar of information. This photo-and-caption technique is highly popular with celebrity magazines. It is quick and simple. A single celebrity photo takes up little space leaving room for other celebrity photos. The cover story about Tiger Woods was longer, of course, but there was no shortage of photos of Tiger, his wife and children, and his alleged mistresses.

    As one moved on, the number of photos and snippets of information multiplied. A fashion layout was first inside, featuring many of the same celebrities and the same clothing featured in OK Weekly. Perhaps, as a before-and-after photo comparison showed. We see celebrities getting coffee, standing in line at a grocery or convenience store, shopping, or playing with their children.

    The photos are, of course, accompanied by brief captions. They walk, they play with dogs, they buy bread, they push their children on playground swings. Yes, indeed, just like us! Next, the Tiger Woods cover story is presented. Additionally, some significant space is given to a story about Amanda Knox, the student in Italy who was convicted of murdering her roommate.

    Fashion layouts are next, featuring the Real Housewives of New Jersey. What celebrity pushed Tiger off the cover? Actress Sandra Bullock. First inside was a fashion layout featuring the 10 best dressed female celebrities of the week. Much like the ones in the two previous magazines described, the layout featured the usual suspects: actresses Penelope Cruz, Kate Hudson, and Drew Barrymore, among others.

    The reader discovers that Brad and Angelina have been a couple for five years. Will the relationship last?

    Celebrity in the 21st Century: A Reference Handbook (Contemporary World Issues)

    Has actor George Clooney finally met his match in model Elisabette Canalis? Next, information about the Tiger Woods situation is presented; the emphasis is on whether his marriage will survive his alleged infidelity. People magazine December 21, took a slightly different approach by featuring Elin Woods on the cover. Celebrities were shown wearing spiked clothing. Movie reviews were presented for a half-dozen upcoming films. On the more serious side, an in-depth article explored the effects of the recession on Wilmington, a small Ohio town.

    Chaz formerly Chastity Bono—daughter-nowson—of singers Sonny and Cher was profiled with emphasis on the impact of gender change. A Top Chef recipe was presented as were numerous advertisements for lingerie and jewelry with celebrities as models. Source and Quality of Celebrity Information 53 Each of these statements requires explanation. First, the four weekly celebrity magazines are more similar than different. With only a few exceptions, the same celebrities were featured in all four magazines.

    The photos in each magazine number in the hundreds. To an infrequent or new reader, the photos and accompanying bits of information seem to be overwhelming. An experienced celebrity magazine reader will think nothing of it. Page after page contains photos, large and small, fitted as neatly together as a completed jigsaw puzzle. But the eye moves quickly, the information is absorbed, and the reader moves on. Furthermore, with the exception of the staged fashion layouts, the photos depict reality. In other words, they are true representations of what was actually happening at the time the photo was taken.

    Captions identify the celebrities and the event or location at which they were photographed. There are cover similarities among the magazines, especially if a celebrity has been the subject of much public interest. But the stories inside are usually different in both tone and approach.