Blake Lively & her publicist criticize People Mag for crashing Blake’s wedding

Everything about Blake Lively is “bold” these days. I mean that seriously. Blake and Ryan Reynolds were married in a secret ceremony in South Carolina eight days ago, and the tabloids are still playing catch-up, because in a bold move, Blake barely leaked anything about the wedding. Blake and Ryan didn’t sell or give away their wedding photos to People Mag or Us Weekly either. Instead, in a bold move, Blake had her wedding styled and organized by Martha Stewart’s people, and the wedding photos will appear exclusively in the December issue of Martha Stewart Weddings. So not only did Blake wedding-block the tabloids, she gave away her exclusive to a prestigious and well-read monthly magazine. And in another BOLD move, Blake and her publicist are taking PEOPLE MAG to task for their cover lie on last week’s cover.

While People magazine is viewed as the veritable bulletin board for publicists’ handouts, the celebrity weekly has drawn the ire of Blake Lively’s team for this week’s cover about her wedding to Ryan Reynolds, which gleefully blared, “People Was There!”

But a source in Blake’s camp sniped, “No, People was not there, unless you count an uninvited photographer sitting on a boat sneaking shots.”

We’re told Lively was concerned that the cover line gave the impression that she had sold her wedding pictures to the weekly, which has recently officially featured the wedding of Drew Barrymore and also Matthew McConaughey.

A Lively rep confirmed, “People was not there, no pictures were sold.”

[From Page Six]

So Blake and her publicist are basically picking a fight with PEOPLE MAG. I cannot emphasis enough how bold that move is. If you’re a celebrity and you don’t like something that People Mag does, you know what happens? Not much. It’s People – the most powerful gossip and celebrity news outlet out there. If you don’t like their coverage (and you’re a celebrity), you simply call your publicist and work something out with People’s editors, a tit for tat to get better coverage. If you’re a celebrity, you basically NEVER publicly call out People Mag for acting like a tabloid, for trying to crash your wedding. Maybe Blake thinks that she doesn’t need People. Maybe she’s just trying to flaunt how important she is now. I don’t know. It will be interesting to see if People’s editors address the issue somehow.

Photos courtesy of WENN & Fame/Flynet.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

75 Responses to “Blake Lively & her publicist criticize People Mag for crashing Blake’s wedding”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Amelia says:

    Not being familiar with the magazine hierarchy of the US, could someone explain to a limey why this is a big deal and what repercussions there would be?
    I’m guessing People are fairly powerful/influential. Yay or nay?

    • Blupp says:

      the People Magazine is read by lots of people and it has a very good reputation. thats because they mainly dont make up stories. if there is something it in its practially from the celebs publicist. so its pretty reliable.
      on the other hand they are pretty much bending over for the celebs, its very celeb friendly thats another reason why people dont pick a fight, there is no real reason for it and as mentioned above you can easily work something out with them.

      i dont know maybe lets say People Magazine is the Meryl Streep of gossip magazines and The Enquirer is Lindsay Lohan.

    • BW says:

      It used to be the classy (and I use that term loosely) celebrity magazine. Nice stories about celebs. They didn’t make stuff up. Nice stories about real people who’ve done amazing things to warm your heart. No dirt, unless it was absolutely true. I haven’t read it in years.

      • pwal says:

        I agree that People used to have a great reputation. But for years, former lower-tier tabloid writers like Dave Kaplan have made People their home, therefore the quality of the magazine has diminished.

        And while I think that Lively and her rep’s high-hat response may not do her any favors in the long run, I can’t help agreeing with them about People’s misleading headline. The Jolie-Pitt All About the Twins cover come to mind; there was nary a detail about the twins except that they were born in France to Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. Shoddy reporting at its most glaring.

    • Riana says:

      This may not be 100% accurate or clear from a non US perspective but People are kind of the magazine version of Oprah.

      Basically if you want to gush about something in your life they’re the go-to magazine for it. First baby pics, wedding pics, getting your story out about your divorce…People.

    • mln76 says:

      People is the celebrity friendly/publicist friendly mag that is usually accurate but also has a very santitized version of gossip. It’s the first place a celebrity goes to get their story out and the only tabloid an A-list celebrity would do a cover/sourced interview.
      Us Weekly is also celeb friendly but is also known to run false covers in most cases a celebs PR team would only give info in background quotes.
      Star and In Touch are pretty much all gossip and completely unreliable the only people who leak info to them are C and D listers looking for publicity.

    • Jess says:

      They’re pretty much the gold standard. I wouldn’t even call them a tabloid. They just print confirmed celebrity news and stories. Obviously, Blake did get married, and they got a lot of the details right. Blake’s just mad that Martha’s mag is mad. People got their scoop and ran with it, like any good celebrity and entertainment mag would.

  2. marie says:

    I’m sorry, but I fail to see how she’s important.. Is she upset because the travelling pants were missplaced again?

  3. Justaposter says:

    Good for her!

    People has gone down hill for years, and I was glad that my subscription ran out.

    Of course I am old enough to remember when People was actually a good magazine.

  4. Kelsea says:

    How do they say “no pictures were sold” if they’ve already confirmed Martha Stewart has them? And if People had a photographer sneaking shots then where are they?

  5. Mia 4S says:

    I can’t help but think she needs to be more careful. She’s NOT important, and she married Ryan Renyolds, not Clooney or DiCaprio. There is not much power here really, and I doubt there will be.

    She’s playing house rather than promoting projects or working, which is fine, but Hollywood won’t have much trouble rolling their eyes and moving on.

    • gee says:

      This is what I was thinking. She finally made her way to B-list, and it’s just barely.

    • Kiki says:

      Couldn’t agree with you more. Just wait until the Brangelina wedding, and the commotion that THAT will bring, no one will remember Blake Lively or Ryan Reynolds. All I can see for her now is a Jessica Alba move, selling diapers. Being on the cover of tabloids/mags doesn’t equal having a career or talent. I really don’t get why Lainey is so all over this girl.

    • Carolyn says:

      Considering the epic failure of Green Lantern these two don’t have a lot of star power when it comes to selling movie tickets. I’d put them C list at best. Their lack of chemistry onscreen was staggering.

      Because of Blake’s natural styling flair (remember, she styles herself) I can see her working with Martha doing flower arrangements. Not too many other movie opps for her.

  6. Shitler says:

    She’s never making People’s Most Beautiful Lists again that’s for sure!

  7. normades says:

    She sold the “exclusives” to another mag and doesn’t want another to steal it’s thunder.

    Or she’s just complaining so her wedding stays relevant until the Martha Stewart article comes out.

  8. Birdie says:

    Weird that People writes on the cover: People was there.. when the weren’t. They really act like they have all the exclusive details and are quite annoying by doing so. Us Weekly must kick their asses and now they’re getting desperate.

  9. Riana says:

    Maybe I’m too young but..how is Martha’s mag a step up from People?

    Martha Stewart hasn’t been a big deal for year, not like she was before her arrest and I’m guessing her magazine has a very specific audience.

    To me it seems like Blake is marketing herself to a much older crowd who either likes Martha or really likes baking (as she supposedly does) but I don’t see where the payoff for her is supposed to come. Is she angling to get herself a cooking tv talk show thing In the new future? Is she trying to become mini-Martha for the under 30 bunch?

    Seriously…is this bold or just bizarre.

    • Liv says:

      I guess selling the pics to Martha Stewart is her trying to proove that she’s not a famewhore. In the end, it doesn’t matter if she’s selling them to People or Martha Stewart, but the Martha Stewart edition is apparently coming out later this year, so people are going to think she didn’t sell the pics at all.

      • Belle says:

        I keep posting the same thing… but do we know that the pics were actually SOLD to Martha Stewart??

        I might be just being naive, and I am no fan of Blake’s, but I keep thinking that there might be no grand scheme by Blake here. I keep hearing that Blake and Martha are pals of some sort, and obviously Blake is a fan of her work. So, maybe… just maybe…. MS wanted to have her people do Blake’s wedding for her… and (again) maybe… Blake either offered or agreed to give her photos in exchange. If Blake likes MS, then she would probably enjoy having a few of her pics in the wedding magazine? Maybe? (hehe)

      • Liv says:

        I’d say she didn’t want the world to know that she is the kind of person who sells her wedding out…and so she opted for Martha Stewart: people will see her pics but it’s not so famewhorey like a magazine. The word “sell” could still apply to her wedding, even if she didn’t get money out of it. Being a celebrity and publishing pictures of your wedding is kind of selling yourself, isn’t it? ;-)

        This is speculation, of course :-)

    • SallySue says:

      Martha Stewart Weddings is surprisingly a pretty popular magazine with younger brides. It doesn’t really have much to do with Martha Stewart besides having her name and a bunch of DIY stuff. The weddings in the magazine are typically more laid back and trendy versus the formal and over-the-top weddings in other publications like Grace Ormonde’s magazine. Having MSW cover their wedding is probably Blake’s way of saying “Hey everybody, come look at how normal and chill I am!” They still get the wedding pictures out there, but it focuses more on the wedding and not the couple. It could actually be a very smart move for her. Earlier this year, Eva Amurri had her wedding in MSW and I think maybe Mary Steenburgen’s daughter did last summer. It’s pretty popular for the less flashy (or less known) celebrities, or children of celebrities.

    • Belle says:

      I would have loved the Martha Stewart people to style my wedding! Had my 17th anniversary yesterday, so I guess I am officially in the ‘old’ crowd. I have seen MS wedding magazines in the possession of ‘younger’ family members though, who are planning weddings, so she must not be that out-dated(;

  10. lori says:

    I’d be more scared of Martha “jailhouse” Stewart than People any day. Maybe she had to say something about People not being invited by her and Ryan so Martha would not be totally pissed! That magazine styled and likely paid for most of the wedding to get an exclusive. Martha would loose her sh!t if she thought Blake and Ryan sold out to a tabloid before she gets to use the pics in her magazine.

  11. Samantha says:

    Could it be for legal reasons? If she sold an exclusive to Martha Stewart’s magazine, she may have to publicly make it clear she didn’t sell anything to People.

    • V4Real says:

      So a source from Blake’s camp stated that People Mag was not invited unless you count the photographer hiding out on a boat. Well this was a secret wedding, so how would that photographer even have known to be there, unless someone the couple trusted spilled the beans. If that was the case I would say it was most likely someone from Blake’s camp. She could be fronting like she’s all innocent in this to save face with Martha Stewart. The girl is a publicity hound of course she wants details of her wedding coming out now; she can’t wait untill Martha’s mag come out she needs to stay relevant. She’s a real smart cookie.

  12. Erinn says:

    This is my assumption of the situation:
    Blake wanted her perfect wedding. Martha does weddings amazingly. Martha probably thinks having a young actress featured in her magazine will boost her sales/demographic, and in exchange for doing the wedding she gets the rights to feature the images exclusively. She probably doesn’t want Martha to think she’s screwed them over if other photos get leaked somehow.

    I know a lot of people hate on Blake, but really, there’s nothing about her really worth the effort of hating. She’s relatively normal, bordering bland, and God, the hustle on this girl. The more I hear about her, the more impressed I am.

  13. Jenna says:

    Mkay then. Speaking of the ring, I saw it. I kind of like it…and the simple wedding band too.

  14. bns says:

    Whatever. They tipped People off like they always do. I’m surprised she sold the photos to Martha Stewart though, and not Vogue.

  15. L says:

    People is the PR magazine-they would never deem to call themselves a tabloid. Alot of actors/actresses use them to sell their movie/brand-so it will be interesting to see if she pisses them off. Like others said, I’d be more worried about pissing off Martha.

    I read that People article in the supermarket line, and it’s pictures from a public lake/pond of parts of the reception and the decoy getaway car. Her pictures are going to be in MS weddings anyways.

  16. sillyone says:

    Maybe I am in the minority here but she married Ryan Reynolds for pete sake, this is the same dude that has been possibly engaged more times than Elizabeth Taylor had been married and divorced combined. He falls in love with every woman that looks his way.

  17. Mia 4S says:

    I’m really curious if the hustle this girl is putting out is worth the effort. I see a few comments on the story like “I’m impressed” or “I’m starting to like her”. I get that, I do, I click on the stories, the antics are entertaining. But does any of this give you a desire to see her in more projects? Would you seek out her work? I am hoping like me, the answer is a resounding no way! Famewhore all you want, just don’t expect it to make you interesting as a performer.

    • The Original Mia says:

      Exactly. For all her hustle, she still can’t act and mumbles her way through scenes. I have no desire to see her on TV or in movies and marrying Ryan isn’t going to change that.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        I don’t get why people come down SO hard on this chick. There are a million actresses in Hollywood that are horrifically untalented, guys. Not sure why we give them a free pass and pick on Lively, who while she is no Meryl Streep, is no Biel either.

        Blake Lively is 25 years old and has a decent amount of varied roles under her belt. She’s not winning an Oscar, sure, but she could be doing Scream 10 or bad rom coms, at least she’s TRYING to pick more interesting roles.

        Honestly, I hope that her “antics” (antics being what? talking about baking? Getting married on the sly?) DO make people go see her in movies. It’s only fair, since her so-called “antics” have made so many people hate her without ever seeing ONE movie that she’s been in.

        *sigh* I hate it when people put me a position to stan for this chick but the vitriol is so over-the-top, largely because of an image that a certain blogger created of her as some hustler, casting-couch go-getter. Also, the term “famewhore” is so ridiculously overused. We need to reserve the “famewhore” term for the Kim Kardashians of this world. The ones who have never done ANYTHING but strive to attain fame at the risk of personal pride, self-respect, and morals. Lively is just trying to make a career for herself in acting, she isn’t selling her soul for it.

        I guess I just don’t see her as this awful actress that is so worthy of contempt. I just see her as an average actress who is trying to get better, picking roles pretty strategically, and who is relatively harmless/inoffensive.

      • Mia 4S says:

        @OriginalKitten I actually use the word “famewhore” as a verb, not a noun. One need not be a famewhore to display famewhoreish behavior. ;-)

        I find Blake a good case study because she found some unique and original ways to play the game. Sure no pictures for People, but the pictures are still being released. I’ve seen her in three projects and at best she was inoffensive and bland. If she ever manages to impress me with a performance I’ll reevaluate the famewhoring. I’ve done it, I used to think Penelope Cruz was crap in every english language film she was in (awful!) but she won me over with Vicky Christina Barcelona NOT with her personal life.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Ah, ok I got the distinction-your point is that she has incidents of “famewhoring” but she’s not a full-on “famewhore”.

        Listen, fair enough. At least you’ve actually seen her in a few movies instead of making an assessment of her based on a blog-created fake persona.

        Just remember that she’s 25, she still has a lot of time to prove herself. Maybe she’ll just get worse but I’m betting that if she keeps vying for more interesting roles that she’ll surprise a lot of people.

        At least she’s not walking into Starbucks with a designer kitten dangling from her arm ;)

    • duchessofhazard says:

      LOL, no I wouldn’t want to see Blake Lively in anything. I do admire the fact that for someone who’s only average looking and her acting is subpar, she’s managed to get herself involved in high tier projects (the first American for Chanel, her ad for Gucci, with that director for Drive having a hand in the execution).

      But she’s like Rumpelstiltskin – she’s turned her straw into some sort of gold, and there are lessons she’s teaching that I need to learn (like how to spin my own straw into goal).

  18. Memphis says:

    First it was a stupid move to sell the exclusive to MSM because by the time the pictures come out in December A: no one will care about her dress or wedding, and B: That is not the demographic she needs to shoot for if she wants to do more TV/ movies. Bad call.

    She knows this, so to keep herself and her wedding somewhat relevant..and get some oh’s and ah’s about her dress and wedding.. she leaks details to people then acts indignant about it all.

  19. mercy says:

    Gossip Cop took People to task for saying they were ‘there’ last week.

    Apparently People was tipped off by a local radio station, who were tipped by locals who saw something going on at the location and saw Ryan, and put 2 and 2 together. They were not certain who was getting married until after the fact. The initial reports said Ryan Gosling OR Ryan Reynolds.

    Blake and her mother are huge Martha Stewart fans. She’s been talking up Martha for ages and met her at the Time 100 gala. I’m not sure she would make Martha buy pics. Maybe an ‘I’ll design your wedding in exchange for pics’ agreement at most. But it seems like they’re pretty tight, socialising and spending holidays together.

    Call me crazy, but I don’t think she’s worried about pissing off People at this point. Martha would probably be more concerned about her relationship with People. Their audience is more like hers, and they’ve done many a profile on her.

    • Bodhi says:

      One of my friend’s husband was celled into to bar tend at the wedding, but he wasn’t feeling well so he passed. So close!!

      • mercy says:

        Gah! We almost had an inside source!! LOL… Apparently a children’s choir from a local Baptist church was there, with their parents, but they weren’t told who’s wedding it was in advance. I’m dying to see the dress, even though I’m not a big fan of Marchesa. Some of their wedding gowns are pretty. The Marchesa ladies aren’t talking, but they did say we would see it. Martha had better deliver. :p

  20. Izzy says:

    I read the People article, and they must be getting desperate if that’s the story they ran. It was total BS, they ran stock photos of the venue setup from the venue’s marketing materials, for goodness sake!

  21. Belle says:

    Given that I’m not a fan of Blake’s (though I like Ryan more than most here seem to…lol), I’m not sure why I feel compelled to keep posting!

    I am aware that I could be completely wrong here, but I’m just not getting the impression that there is anything more here than… a wedding. Blake is a MS fan, and has apparently become friends of some sort with her, so maybe Blake really wanted a MS styled wedding, and then offered or agreed to giving up some photos (and details) to the MS wedding magazine. Possibly no SALE at all of photos… and possibly no scheming or ulterior motive on Blake’s part.

  22. lisa2 says:

    I cancelled my subscription for People magazine when they put a none interview from an actress on the cover instead of covering the tragedy that happened in Haiti. People magazine is nothing like it use to be. I guess instead of trying to have some standards they caved and dipped their foot in the trash rags. Sad because I have not bought an issue since April. And never look at the covers now. Shame because I really use to respect them.

  23. Emma says:

    From what I’ve read, none of the photos in Martha’s mag will be of the bride and groom. They will be photos of the decor, food and atmosphere. I think that’s smart. She and Ryan seem low key. I’m not sure why people are so adamant on calling her a famewhore.

  24. Trashaddict says:

    (Plays tiny violin to try to make Blake feel better.)

  25. ctkat1 says:

    I like the ring- the diamond in the engagement ring is huge, obviously, but I like the simplicity of the setting and the pairing with a really lovely thin diamond wedding band.

    http://stylenews.peoplestylewatch.com/2012/09/17/blake-lively-engagement-ring-wedding/

    It’s one of my favorite celebrity ring sets, honestly. Which is surprising, because I’m not a huge fan of Blake’s personal style.

  26. Mandy says:

    She needs to get over herself.