Comments on: NY Times on how Angelina Jolie manipulates her image in the press

By: free ipad get an ipad to test

free ipad get an ipad to test — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:28:57 +0000

Oh my.. Many of these posts comments dont make sense?! Give the guy a break and prevent posting spam

By: NotBlonde

NotBlonde — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:29:29 +0000

She’s 33???!! She looks bout 45, poor thing. All that hard-ass living early in life. Jesus. I’m glad I got all that “wild child” crap out of me while I was still young enough to reverse the effects later on in life…

By the way, anyone who is surprised by this is gullible as hell.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Kim

Kim — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:05:59 +0000

Angelina is polarizing character. Her involment in any thing be it a movie or charity ceases to be about anything else but her. For that reason, her manipulative attempts at charity are mostly greeted with cynism, she does not bring awareness to anything but herself.

How many people have expressed doubts about her charity? No other celebrity has had their charity efforts ridiculed as much.

How come we hear more about her than her charitable efforts? If she went to Congo today, we would stop hearing anything about the conflict but the latest baby – read accessory- she got out of there. It is no accident, it is deliberate.

If she wants her children to learn only good things about her, then she should stop lying. Saying she would never run off with a married man then admitting she did it years later makes me believe that she does not care what her children think of her. All she cares about is getting her name in the tabloids. When the bad girl image had become stale, she cultivated the charity- do gooder- earth mother image which she knew dumb Brad Pitt would fall for. Believe me when this becomes stale, as it has started, she will start the single mother, wronged ex routine. Anything to keep her in the press.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Mayi

Mayi — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:33:11 +0000

Wow, I think we all know that she has been doing this forever….she is a manipulator. What we know of her and all her “good” is just exactly what she wants us to know. BUT we are not stupid.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Yourself

Yourself — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:06:24 +0000

CB don’t apologise for not falling over yourself for Angelina. Monica is right indeed, I loved this site but stopped posting when I felt that your cpmments were always biased in favour of Angelina and against Aniston. I found that unfair because it vilified Aniston who never sought out Angelina to hurt her. Yet she was harangued by Brangelina fans condoned by the commentators especially Jaybird. For that reason, I found the site a bit boring and annoying. Also Brangelina fans would post rubbish about drinking and Zahara taking over the world in order to run people off the site. For a while there they even succeeded. But evil can only succeed for a while. I always believe that in the end, good triumphs.

You go CB. I Love this site a lot.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: mickeh

mickeh — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 03:58:56 +0000

Celebrities aren’t that naive with the press. It’s part and parcel of their career. Fortunately (or unfortyunately?), like AJ, some manage to outwit and outplay the press (pardon the survivor cliche), and in turn the public.

On AJ’s defense, i believe that what she’s doing is quelling all negative press about her to keep her past from the kids. we know Maddox is growing up fast, and she says in a previous interview that she fears he’ll find her not-so-wholesome pictures in the net. who knows what other tihings Maddox might discover? And her other kids are not too far behind.

Maybe it’s hard for her explain her colorful past to the kids. she may have acknowledged her mistakes in the past and is trying to cover now.

If she is the strong-willed, principled woman that she says she is, maybe she should have owed up to her faults. And probably in that way, maybe her children would not make the same mistakes in the future.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Codzilla

Codzilla — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:38:02 +0000

Well said, Monica.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: RAN

RAN — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 19:18:07 +0000

I agree Monica

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: monica

monica — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 18:15:03 +0000

celebitchy… i think that although your stories about angelina jolie have had a harsher slant to them recently, that in no means makes you biased against her. celebs will do things that annoy us and you have a right to not always love them.
i have felt and i know this is true for a lot of other posters that we have stopped coming her because of the aniston bashes/biased news and the jolie love fest from both columnist and commentors.
recently i felt that the news and people have calmed down and there have been more “accurate” coverage has brought a lot of us back to this site. the truth is the celebrities that we love are not all completely good and not all completely bad. i like that you and your site are being a bit more objective and not catering to just one type of commentor anymore. i would hate to see that change now.
thank you

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Celebitchy

Celebitchy — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:51:53 +0000

@Kaiser – that’s a very good point that the NYT Magazine cover story with Aniston comes out this weekend and that didn’t even occur to me.

A lot of you have noticed that our coverage of Angelina, well my coverage of Angelina, has been more biased lately. This is well-deserved criticism and I’m working on it. I addressed some of it in a comment on another post:

http://www.celebitchy.com/23109/aaron_eckhart_wants_angelina_jolie_to_join_dark_knight_cast_as_catwoman/#comment-147836

Thanks for hanging in there with us and continuing to visit and comment.

Report this comment as spam or abuse