Angelina Jolie praised, other celebs mocked in blind-item-y Guardian article

wenn3269440

I had my typin’ fingers all prepared to lash out, but then this Guardian article ended up being a pro-Angelina Jolie piece, so now my typin’ fingers are dancing with joy! The Guardian published a fascinating article written by a “Secret Aid Worker” called “Has anyone worked out if celebrities are worth the effort?” Considering the header photo used by The Guardian was of Angelina and William Hague, I thought it was going to be the same old complaints we always hear, that Angelina is just a tourist, blah blah. But no! Amongst the complaints and funny/tragic “blind items” about unnamed celebrity do-gooders, Angelina’s work is praised extensively. Meaning that amongst professional aid workers, Angelina is viewed as one of the best celebrity advocates out there. Yay! So, let’s do some highlights, and I’m including some of the “blind items”.

Blind item #1: “I am now trying to source an appropriately cut agency T-shirt for a famously curvaceous actress, having emailed her management to ask her cup size.”

Blind item #2: “How did I end up spending hours tracking down European bottled mineral water for a British soap actress for every stage of her African tour?”

Blind item #3: “For one American VIP’s 12- hour visit to Aceh, hours were spent locating a hat with a UN-only logo. When we found one somewhere in a cupboard in Jakarta, a triumphant message went to New York – only for his people to turn it down, saying it was a floppy cricket hat “and he only wears baseball caps.” We built a helipad so he could visit a particular transitional shelter site, and told the community that it was a volleyball court. [My guess: Leonardo DiCaprio.]

Blind item #4: The British TV actor who, when offered an overnight stay in a refugee camp in South Sudan to bond with war survivors, rather exceeded his brief by getting drunk with and seducing one of the local women.

Blind item #5: The up-and-coming actress treated a room full of tsunami survivors to a re-enactment of her most famous role. “It wouldn’t have been so bad, if it hadn’t involved drowning,” he says.

Blind item #6: The Asian actress invited, with great fanfare, to speak on her agency’s behalf at a water and sustainability conference in Tokyo. “She walked up to the podium, and started reading her own poetry… No mention of us, or water, or anything. Just … poems. Thank God no media were there and my boss was in New York.”

Blind item #7: “I remember a night in a South Sudanese dive bar with a visiting internationally fancied film star. He was blind drunk and when we went over to talk to him he started lecturing me about not knowing about South Sudan. ‘I mean, no offence, but how long have you actually been here?’ he asked. I said, ‘Over three years now.’ Him: (while creepily stroking my arm) ‘I really love aid workers’.” [my guess: George Clooney.]

Love for Angelina Jolie: A smitten former UNHCR-er remembers working with Angelina Jolie with misty eyes. “She knew more about refugees, and had been to more places than I had,” he sighs. “She had her own cameraman, so all I had to do was find the locations and the refugees.” Another long-standing project manager said: “I was impressed with her in Haiti, in Jordan and in Sri Lanka. She left experts speechless every time.”

A great David Beckham story: “the English football star whose only request on a gruelling trip to Sierra Leone with a packed schedule and very basic accommodation was that he could have the evening to kick a ball about with some local kids.”

[From The Guardian]

This Secret Aid Worker also cites Sean Penn as a guy who went through a big transformation, saying that first Penn was a temperamental douchebag in Haiti, but Penn stuck with it and became a genuine and dedicated aid worker. The whole piece is worth a read and I feel pretty confident that at least one of those Sudan stories was about George Clooney.

wenn20025121

wenn20457612

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

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

172 Responses to “Angelina Jolie praised, other celebs mocked in blind-item-y Guardian article”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mrs. Darcy says:

    Guesses for number 4? I was going to say Fassy but it says British t.v. star…

    • A says:

      I’m so sick of blind items! 99% are made up and people believe them like they’re facts.
      Didn’t the article a few weeks ago tell us all about this fakery? Exposing celebs and how anyone can make up any gossip to these rags? Literally ANYONE can make up these stupid stories, especially blind items because there is zero chance of being sued.
      It’s scary to think that we as people are getting dumber…I swear five years ago no one believed these blind item and gossip was just fun reading not to be taken seriously, but now, I guess because we’re so gossip starved we’ll believe anything??

      • epiphany says:

        I think blind items are fun, and they’ve been around for quite some time. Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons invented the blind item way back in the 1930′s. Yes, some of them are so vague that they could apply to anyone, and some of them are undoubtedly made up, but who cares? I used to work behind the scenes in the fashion industry, and I can tell you unequivocally, no one achieves any level of success in show business simply by being nice. Ruthlessness is the name of the game, and, apart from notable exceptions like Jolie, many of the celebrities involve themselves in these causes only to draw attention to themselves, not to the plight of victims. Have you heard Clooney even mention Darfur in the last two years? I can absolutely believe these narcissistic, self-involved people made outrageous demands for their own comfort when they should have focused on the cause.

      • bluhare says:

        I love them too. So what if you’ll never know if they’re true or not. Some of them are great!

        In this case I give them credence as they’re from someone who actually works with people doing the aid tours.

      • FingerBinger says:

        I’m sick of blinds too. Especially blinds about health or sexual orientation.

      • Luca76 says:

        I highly doubt the Guardian would feature made up blinds.

      • Sasha says:

        @A
        Take it easy! You almost sound angry. Why did you even venture to comment if you feel so adamant in your disgust for blind items?
        These are hardly in the same category as, say CDaN or Lainey, as the info comes from a supposed (probable) aid worker, but if I do entertain the idea that the blurbs might be truthful then I must be dumb, right?
        Or, conversely, is it possible that you wanted to get right in at the gate to tell us what horseshit it all is because you didn’t like the accusation of one of the logically surmised items? Yeah, I think that might be it.
        Where did you see that article you spoke of? Not that I don’t use my own judgment when reading blinds. It’s just gossip and all fun in a busy day.

      • Sasha says:

        ETA:
        Anyone who hasn’t read the Guardian article, definitely should.
        It’s not written as blind items but graciously leaving out the names of those whose stories are unflattering. The point of it all is to highlight the importance of those who genuinely give their time and energy for whichever cause and, also, to point out how those who’d use their visits as photo-ops for their own gain are seriously imposing on the aid workers.

    • seesittellsit says:

      Well British TV star could mean: Cumberbatch, Freeman, Clive Owen, Idris Elba, Hugh Laurie, David Tennant . . . who among them has been in the South Sudan?

      • neve says:

        simon cowell ……lol

      • shawnamarieanne says:

        The british TV star – with emphasis on TV. I’m not sure if Cumberbatch and Clive Owen can be considered TV stars. Not sure about the rest.

  2. Astrid says:

    Team Dame Angelina!

    • Tristan says:

      She is AMAZING! I would never have the courage to go to any if these terrifying places, even if I had an army of bodyguards. Anyone slagging her off is an idiot. She is doing more for the world’s desperate people than any other celebrity, and she is definitely doing it out of love. Her place in Hollywood pantheon of greats is assured, so she has no need to be putting herself in these situations if she genuinely didn’t care.

    • Shambles says:

      She’s simply amazing.

    • Guest says:

      Polishing my Angelina badge.

    • darkdove says:

      good for Angelina she is amazing always been on her side.

    • phlyfiremama says:

      I know!! She just makes my heart happy!! WHAT A WOMAN~

    • Bell says:

      Yes! More articles about Angelina please and less about the Kardashian clan.

    • Neil says:

      I am curious about what one anonymous commentor on the Guardian site had to say about AJ. Ostensibly a field worker he had this to say, “I’m actually surprised by the feedback the writer has presented about Ms. AJ. I have crossed paths with her on multiple occasions and I would describe her as cunning.”
      Cunning…. what kind of vague catch-all phrase is that? Is that a bad thing or is that a good thing? Makes me realize that pettiness can be found in abundance no matter where one looks.

  3. Div says:

    Interesting. Sean is a complete douche, but I’ve always thought that he was very serious about his charity work so I’m not surprised. Of course Angie is fantastic…..the S. Sudan one is DEFINITELY George Clooney. Blind Item #1 seems a little sexist, tbh. #5 made me laugh because it was so incredibly horrible and clueless that it shocked me. I kind of love blind items from serious places like The Guardian, because while most blind items are BS you know this gossip at least comes from fairly legitimate sources.

    People like Angie and the late Audrey Hepburn have brought a lot of attention to issues in the general public, so I imagine the good outweighs the bad when it comes to celeb endorsements.

    • Hautie says:

      I want to know who #5 is too! LAMO! Who is that dang dense, to do something like that? Seriously.

      And the ones about the drunken sleazy international “movie star”. I thought of Mel Gibson. Which of course is my go to guy, for the really tacky behavior toward women. Or even Nicolas Cage. Both men who need to avoid drinking in general when there are women near by.

      • Kiddo says:

        Sean Penn? You can be sincere about charity and a douche simultaneously.

      • mia girl says:

        Agree kiddo, and while it can be simultaneous, isn’t there always a more dominant force?

        What I mean is that –
        Sean Penn is an asshole who can be nice some of the time.
        He’s not a nice guy who can be an asshole some if the time. Or even a 50/50 split.

      • V4Real says:

        For number 6 Maggie Q comes to mind. Or, maybe Ming Na Wen, she has great fanfare from Marvel’s Agents of Shield.

        Edit: Just learned it might be Li Bingbing from the movies Resident Evil and Transformers.

    • Jen43 says:

      I agree about Sean Penn. His reputation is so bad that no amount of charity could ever rehabilitate it, assuming he even cares about his image at all, which I doubt he does. Therefore, I have thought his charity work must be sincere..

    • bettyrose says:

      MTE on Sean Penn. I totally believe that charity work brings out his best side.

      • Jayna says:

        And it is even beyond celebrity charity work. He lived down there for many months at a time off and on for a couple of years and learned everything from them as far as what needed to be done and worked within to help. He didn’t fly in for a week here or there. He was in the trenches. I have much admiration for him in Haiti when the passing fad to help Haiti had long passed in Hollywood.

      • bluhare says:

        Agree, Jayna. He stuck with that even when the cameras were off.

    • Sarah says:

      I thought of Sophia Vergara for #1

    • SuePerb says:

      The Guardian has two sides, and tabloid journalism does exist in this site. Ever since they needed to broaden their readership they dumbed down and sensationalised stories and headed them to garner the most clicks. Now a lot of The Guardian is total dross (on par with the Daily Mail) and inaccurate reporting where anything not exactly news is concerned. Anyone can submit articles and this kind of reporting goes on every day.

      • Sasha says:

        @SuePerb
        Of course, it’s rubbish! I mean, the Clooney one alone is utterly ridiculous!
        He would never get blind drunk (or piss in the Nile) nor uncharacteristically speak in such an egotistic manner. Humbug, I say!

      • SuePerb says:

        I am not saying it is lies , what I am responding to is the bit about the Guardian being a serious news site with all credible reporting. It isn’t anymore it’s just as tabloid as the Daily Mail with a serious (all be it a bias) news side. This is a feature written by an anonymous person, hardly Woodward and Burnstein. It is just a fun article to guess who they are but you can’t say it is all legit.

      • Sasha says:

        @SuePerb
        Have you read the Guardian article? It’s not about a guessing game, at all.
        Kaiser laid it out like that because this is a gossip site and it’s entertaining.
        See my replies under comment #1.
        Your saying that the Guardian is on par with the DM is your opinion. I, myself, wouldn’t go that far.
        And I can say it’s all legit but I wouldn’t presume to know. I also wouldn’t assume that’s it’s not because I might not like any of the innuendo.
        The fact that the author declined to name names of those mentioned anonymously says that it wasn’t about salacious gossip and more about getting out the message about the arrogance and lack of integrity of certain (and if the shoe fits) celebrities where the cause isn’t their first priority for being there.
        Someone posted this below: celebrityanddevelopment dot wordpress dot com.
        Haven’t looked around yet, not sure if names are named, but will when I get a chance.
        Sorry, don’t know how to make a link here.

      • SuePerb says:

        My comment is about the Guardian as a serious news site with credible reporting. Many articles are not written by journalists but anyone. Maybe you never read the Guardian before and after they expanded their readership. I did, and I am not the only one who has seen the change. Read the serious news and see the comments, I am not the only one who noticed this.

        The author obviously works in the field and writes various articles about the work. She tends to make it about herself (often talking about how men want to chat her up) and tries to make the article fun to read. If you think this is groundbreaking news then that’s ok, but it is gossip and unlike other aid workers articles (who own what they say) it is mainly fluffy pieces she writes. People for years have been saying the same thing as what she wrote.

  4. lisa2 says:

    I’m sure the Guardian was looking for some dirts.. they had just done a thing being critical of her Summit.. so this as I have no doubt a follow up that didn’t go the way they wanted. She has been doing this for 14 years. And in all that time she has been praised because she does her homework and she knows her stuff.

    There is part where they talk about her having her own photographer.. YES. and that is important because I know her naysayers will be here to make some silly comment. These are the same people that scream “IF THERE IS NOT PICTURE THEN IT DIDN’T HAPPEN”..LOL

    HER job is to document what she sees at these camps. The conditions, the stories. Yes she could do that with her notes..but when you want people to help make change; they need tos see the conditions these people are living in. Photographic evidence is a great visual.

    Now lets see how some will spin that.

    • Josephine says:

      I can also imagine her collecting some material for a documentary, which I think would be super interesting.

      • Guest says:

        ITA with both of you and Lisa2 , Angelina needs documentary evidence when she goes back to reporting to UNHCR nad UN bosses they have to be shown this to gets further attention. Sometimes visual impacts are a greater impact.

    • Louise177 says:

      I never understood why the haters attack Angelina for having a cameraman when so does everybody else. Anytime a UN Ambassador or any celebrity representing an organization they get photographed. Baffled why only Angelina is criticized.

      • Maya says:

        Haters don’t know the meaning of the word awareness – that’s why they constantly attack her.

      • darkdove says:

        her haters do it because to them she should only do charity in the U S A doing charity in other places is for attention most of the comments from them are the same only masking the jelousy they feel for her, she lives an amazing life and they hate her for it because they cant.

      • V4Real says:

        For once can yall just enjoy a story about AJ without bringing up “the haters?” It’s like your inviting the naysayers.

        You shouldn’t take anything personal anyone says about AJ or any other celeb you like. Almost every celeb has their haters. I dislike Kim K and Paltrow with a passion but it doesn’t mean I’m jealous of them or want their amazing life. I just don’t like the women.

      • Samtha says:

        It doesn’t matter what she does. The haters will find something to slam her for.

      • Tarsha says:

        Yep, and apparently it’s the UN that supplies the camera crew, it is their camera equipment and camera crew, not some pap for hire.

    • Mireille says:

      The Guardian was critical of the Summit, so could care less about this piece even if it does place Angie in a good light while dropping “blind items” about others. Angie’s dedication and donation of time and money over the years can attest to her sincerity and concern for refugees. There’s no “PR self-image” motive in any of her undertakings. People from UNHCR, UN, and others have always praised her and her work ethic.

      On a different note: My extended family, my mother’s ancestral home is Aceh. That region was completely devastated by the 2004 tsunami with thousands of lives lost. Along with aid, a visit from an aid worker, even a celebrity — anyone who cared — to the people in that region would have meant so much to those who live there and who lost so much. I wish other celebrities would take these visits and trips more seriously — so many of them have never experienced the devastation that the Acehnese have.

      • Dawn says:

        I am sorry but I am a “hater” of the word “hater”. The minute I see it I stop reading. Most people have an opinion of someone or something and because they don’t fawn over someone or something does NOT make them a “hater” it just means they experience a different feeling about that person or that place or that thing. Can we just dump that stupid word “hater” please. As for AJ she had a wild upbringing and a wild youth and yet she turned those experiences into something like this. I believe she walks her talk and to me that counts for everything!

      • lisa2 says:

        @Dawn.. that word is appropriate in many instances.

        It is not about not liking Angelina.. people have a right to like whom they choose. This goes deeper..and perhaps you are naive to some of the sick things her HATERs say about her, Brad and their children. That is not about not liking someone. That is beyond that on a level I don’t see with others. You may only read this site and a few others. and may not know what these people are doing on other sites. I’m not going to repeat their disgusting post; but it is all about HATE.. hate for a woman that has done nothing to them personally.. So the use of that word is Right. And maybe those of us that are using it have seen/read more than you have.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The word is unlikely to apply to a lot of posters here. The crew over on FF? Hater is a nice word to describe them.

    • Katherine says:

      The UN, and that includes UNHCR, documents its work. UNHCR has always sent a photographer to document Jolie’s work in the field as well as that of other workers and Good Will Ambassadors. UN and UNHCR also document Jolie and other UNHCR reps’ meetings with government officials. Though at the beginning of her work with UNHCR, Jolie specifically asked that her travels in the field not be photographed.

      How else would they have photos of their work and of their officials at work?

      So let’s be clear, these are UN photographers documenting UN activities.

  5. Betti says:

    Jolie has always been dedicated in her aid work (unlike most other celebs) and has done a lot behind the scenes. She is one of the few who actually cares and you can see this – its not to boost her profile etc.. its because she really wants to help.

    She’s a great role model. While i may shade her acting skills a little (she can over do it at times) i think she has a great career behind the camera as a director and producer.

  6. ClaireB says:

    So happy about the A.J. stories, and the Beckham one is very touching too.

    Who the hell is that up and coming actress with the famous drowning role?

    • Josephine says:

      Possibly Eva Green? She drowned at the end of one of the James Bond movies (Casino Royale?) and it was a break-out role for her, so that would fit “up and coming.” It was a memorable drowning scene, which is what made me think of it.

      • Lucy2 says:

        That’s a good guess, but I can’t find any stories about her visiting with tsunami survivors. The only actress that comes up is Naomi Watts, and I wouldn’t consider her up and coming anymore nor do I think she is so clueless as to do such a thing.

    • L says:

      My first thought for #5 was Kate Winslet!

  7. Sugar says:

    Interesting article and I think you’re correct that it was George Clooney doing the drunken stroking of the arm.

    • BangersandMash says:

      orrrrrrrr…..

      Ben Affleck has been about Sudan for years now….. so!

      • Liberty says:

        Bingo.

      • Luca76 says:

        Ding ding ding

      • zut alors! says:

        Ben’s focus was in Congo, not South Sudan. My vote goes to George Clooney. He probably went with a case of Casamigos tequila to endear himself to everyone.

      • Kate says:

        Yeah, Affleck’s work in Congo has had a lot of cross-over with Sudan. Plus this is just standard Affleck behaviour. Clooney for all his faults isn’t the type of guy who tries to belittle a young aid worker to make himself feel smart. He starts fights with much bigger fish. Affleck on the other hand, this describes pretty much every interaction he has with young women. Try to make them feel stupid, then get grabby.

    • Mata says:

      Definitely Clooney. There have been non-blind item stories about him doing and saying the exact same kind of things in Sudan.

    • Original Cyn says:

      Only if the aid worker was a guy

  8. GlimmerBunny says:

    I love blind item articles! I’m terrible at guessing them though. And so happy to hear about AJ and Becks, they do both seem like very kind and decent people.

  9. Kiddo says:

    I don’t know why, but getting a Shailene Woodley vibe on the poetry reader?

  10. Goats on the Roof says:

    Angelina Jolie is no dilettante. She has dedicated a huge part of her life to being an advocate for refugees, and her genuine interest in their well being shows. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a bad word about her devotion and knowledge from anyone who has worked with her on these humanitarian causes.

  11. sofia says:

    There was a comment on the article I totally agree with: “I sympathise with questioning the value of such a trip but the reality is First World media get bored with stories. They seem to lose interest in a crisis quite quickly, despite the ongoing hell for individuals involved. A celeb visit can put the story back on the news agenda – sad but true.”

    MY question is, even when the story comes back to the news agenda, what really happens? What i see is this sort of footnote news where the news are pretty much about the celeb being so amazing and less about the problem they are trying to give focus. So the question about efficiency remains unanswered.

    • Kiddo says:

      Excellent point.

      • sofia says:

        I actually thought about this, as if I was famous and felt others wanted me to do this sort of thing. Just the thought of profiting from other’s vulnerabilities left me really uncomfortable. It’s always self serving if there’s a camera there. Even if you mean well and do it to bring awareness. But then, what are the REAL results of it? These matters are so complex and go beyond money, there’s politics involved too. Sometimes I just feel that doing something good for others just in our neighboorhood/city like helping the youth/elders is more effective than going to 3rd world countries. It’s sad, but I really believe in it. It’s about encouraging compassion and generosity from where we are to the ones who are close to us and really making changes.

      • dottie says:

        Yes sofia buying shoes is more ‘fun’ than caring for the plight of your fellow human beings (insert rolled eyes here). Thankfully however, even without the numbers, we can confidently assert that when called on to help in the ways that they can, rhere are more people who will answer that call than not.

      • Katherine says:

        No, it is not “always self serving if there’s a camera there..” That camera is there to document work and to show the world what is going on.

        UNHCR is in constant need of funds to support their life saving and life sustaining work. Photographs of field work and refugees is a big part of fund raising campaigns. This is pretty basic stuff.

      • Sofia says:

        @Dottie: My comment about shows doesn’t reflect how I feel, it was a comment about our superficial, overwhelmed and individualistic society. And I don’t really see that when in need more people respond to the cause than the ones who not. Not at all.

        @Katherine: I understand the importance of documenting, because without it you can’t really ask people’s attention, can you? But you can’t deny that the image of the celebrity benefits from it. I’m not talking about just showing what’s going on, I’m talking about documenting the celebrity visit and the reason behind the visit. So yes, in my point of view even when people mean well they always capitalize from it somehow.

    • inthekitchen says:

      If there are weirdos who buy every single article of clothing and pair of shoes that Kate wears, then I am sure there are some people who will make a donation when they see their favorite celeb advocating for a particular cause. Maybe keeping those donations coming in is enough since the celebs volunteer (you’d hope!)? Just a thought…

      • sofia says:

        Buying shoes is fun, donating for a charity is not perceived in the same way. Unless someone show the numbers I’m very skeptical about most fans contributing to their idols charities/causes. Because their focus will be on how great they are, how generous and not the cause itself because that’s the opposite of escapism which celebs provide to all of us.

      • MaximeDuCamp says:

        Saw this was addresses below after I posted but I’ll leave this here anyway.

        @sofia, well off the top of my head Tom Hiddleston’s fans have raised at least 100 k (not sure if that was $ or £) for UNICEF over the last few years via a fundraiser for his birthday. I’m sure that it’s a drop in the bucket compared to what they need and hopefully what they get from other sources, but it’s a not insignificant sum, that they otherwise wouldn’t have received. I imagine that other fandoms have done similar fundraisers for other celebs/charities. And let’s not forget the astounding amount of money that a wide range of celebs garnered for ALS via the ice bucket challenge. Not to say that some of these celebs are doing it more for what they can get out of it, or do much more than a fly-by visit that at times is more disruptive than helpful, but overall I imagine that they do more good than harm to the cause.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think some of the success of the Stella Artois Buy A Lady A Drink campaign could be tracked to Matt Damon fans.

      • Sofia says:

        @MaximeDuCamp & @notasugarhere: I didn’t say people didn’t donate, some do it but not substantially in ways that REALLY encourage changes. It’s better than nothing but my point was about efficiency. The ALS example is a great one, but sadly an exception. See it in this way, see how much a celebrity profits, their success and think about their impact for doing whatever made them famous and then see how much they can do speaking about a cause. Think about donations, or media coverage with some depth to it. From what I see it’s pretty residual. You’ll always find exceptions but considering the number of people who are “interested” in causes I guess it’s safe to say that most of them are pretty inefficient for the cause it self. But this is also in part media’s responsibility I guess.

    • Lucy2 says:

      That is definitely true. Though I think the better news sources will work more about the issues into the piece. Something like ET or Access Hollywood? Not so much.

    • LAK says:

      The guardian has a columnist/journalist, Marina Hyde, who wrote a brilliantly funny book about this very point. It’s called ‘Celebrity: How entertainers took over the world and why we need an exit strategy’. It spawned a column in a similar style to the column from which the above post has been sourced.

      It’s sounds so much like Marina’s writing ‘voice’ and style that i’m surprised she’s not the author.

      The book details the many ridiculous ways celebrities have hijacked everything from politics to charity. And she names names. No blind items there.

      And that blind item is definitely George Clooney. If not, I would nominate Ben Affleck next because he has an interest in Congo, and South Sudan is a base of operations if you wish to deal with Congo.

      • sofia says:

        Thank you LAK, I’m definitely going to look for it. A person who comment on the guardian studied this matter and has website: “This website reports the work of a research project examining the work of fame, celebrity and public figures in international development. The research project is now concluded, this site is a legacy site that allows people to engage with the work, data and sources.”
        https://celebrityanddevelopment.wordpress.com

        I didn’t have the time to see it in detail, but it seems to have a lot of info.

  12. neer says:

    Nice to know that AJ’s work as humanitarian is well respected by people on field. They have witnessed how she does her humanitarian work, so they could say how she behaves.

  13. bette says:

    Bliind item #5 has to be the worst! Who thinks refugees or people in this of distress and displacement would give 2 hoots about some “actress” in re-enacting a drowning scene! This is narcissism at its worst.

    The only actresses I can think of in semi-drowning scenes would be Naomi Watts in that “The Impossible” or Julia Roberts in “Sleeping With the Enemy”, but neither is up and coming. However, I never see superhero movies and maybe some up and coming actress had a drowning scene in one of those.

    • piapia says:

      The tsunami happened in 2004, so perhaps she was up-and-coming at the time?

    • Kitten says:

      I cannot imagine that Watts would be this ignorant and out-of-touch.

      • Seán says:

        Blind Item #5 is 100 per cent fiction. I know rich and privileged celebrities can be out of touch with reality but you’d be hard pressed to find anyone that insensitive.

        Someone took the stereotype of the narcisstic, self-absorbed actress and passed it off as fact.

      • bette says:

        Yes, wouldn’t think it was Watts either, it seems like it would be someone ala Amber Heard or Shailene Woody who believes the public is waiting with rapt adoration at everything that spews out of their mouths.

        When I read this, it reminded me of the scene in Tropic Thunder where his captors force Ben Stiller to re=enact his performance as a mentally challenged man child

    • Luca76 says:

      I thought possibly Kate Winslet but does she do aid work?

      • BangersandMash says:

        You got it.

        Thespian entertainment runs in her blood.

      • suziekew says:

        I was thinking of a more recent tsunami and if so, Kristen Stewart comes to mind. She had a drowning scene in New Moon and I recall some kind of benefit she did a few years back. She and Nikki Reed did go to Africa back in 2009 – not sure what exactly for but could fit the scenario somewhat. Just a guess, KStew fans please don’t come after me.

  14. Lucy2 says:

    Good to know that some take it seriously, educate themselves, and do what they can to help. Sad that others will go inyo a terrible situation like that, and still only care about their own needs. I don’t understand why the people just don’t say no sometimes. No, I’m sorry, we simply don’t have fancy European bottled water in this part of Africa. No, I’m sorry, we don’t have a hat for you. then move on with whatever they’re actually supposed to be doing. Coddling celebrities like that only feeds into their behavior. I’m sure it’s more complicated than that, it’s just frustrating to hear about so much time wasted on such stupid things.

  15. Debbie says:

    Blind number one I have to go with Dunham. I mean famously curvy of those girls she is the only one that is always taking a political stand and wanting attention for her opinions. I can’t think of anyone else.

    • InvaderTak says:

      I was thinking kat Dennings for some reason. Doesn’t she do unicef? I could be hallucinating.

    • doofus says:

      but Dunham (if you mean Lena) has NO boobage (NOT SHAMING, just pointing out facts…I’ve reluctantly seen her show and she’s an A-cup at most…) and they specifically mention “cup size”.

      someone above said ScarJo and that’s who I think it is…and she does do aid work…

  16. Maya says:

    Yay finally from the people who worked with Angelina telling the truth.

    We fans have always known that she was genuine but hopefully now, the haters can shut up.

    • Guest says:

      The news papers intention was to bring Angelina down and try to dig some dirt up but it came out empty handed, yet it exposed other so called do gooders what does that tell you LOL.

      • Katherine says:

        Precisely so why the headline above? We all know that’s all most people will see – and they will believe it.

  17. Jegede says:

    David Beckham is awesome.

    • sills says:

      Loved this story about Beckham, glad to hear he’s not at all a diva and just wants to bring some joy into struggling kids’ lives in the best way he knows how.

    • Kitten says:

      These are the typical stories about Beckham. He is consistently described as a very humble, down-to-earth guy–the opposite of the rich athlete stereotype.

      • Jegede says:

        Yes Kitten & sils.

        Even the former Beckham bodyguard from years back who wrote a story trashing most of them, had ONLY the nicest things to say about DBecks.

        I’ve never known anyone who has met this guy that does not have the coolest things to say bout him.

    • Bridget says:

      I loved that. It warmed even my cold, black heart.

    • zut alors! says:

      I never really had an opinion of Beckham one way or another, until I saw the documentary he did about a trip he took with some friends to the Amazon. He seemed like a very dedicated dad and came across as humble and not ego driven at all. I was pleasantly surprised.

  18. hadlyB says:

    I love the David B story – I can just see him asking ” can I have a ball to kick around later?”

  19. Drummer says:

    I think the famously curvy woman is either Sofia Vergara or Salma Hayek. Or JLo?

    • wfb says:

      Oh definitely Salma Hayek, she did that breast feeding thing right?

    • Hautie says:

      I don’t think it is going to be an American actress. What about the Kelly Brook… the English model… the one with the body. And the boobs. That like to have her picture taken?

    • JENNA says:

      ScarJo

  20. Esmom says:

    #2 sounds just like an Ashley Judd story I remember hearing about but the item says the person is British so that’s not right. It’s probably not uncommon for many celebs to ask for special favors like that. Heck, I work at a non-profit with volunteers every day and we get non-celeb special snowflakes who don’t want to drink from our water cooler and ask us for bottles instead. :)

  21. A says:

    The UN/UNHCR/UNICEF is so corrupt, I side eye anyone who works for them.

    • lisa2 says:

      They are what we have.. and until something better comes along. side eye away.

    • Guest says:

      Have you got any hard evidence of corruptions , seeing that you are making a factual comment?

    • Allie P says:

      Any corruption associated with UN/UNHCR/UNICEF – and there’s a lot less of it than people tend to assume – tends to involve national governments or local big bosses siphoning off funds. UN aid workers are really dedicated people, who work incredibly hard for little money, and are not on the take – I say that from experience, having acted as an independent auditor of several large-scale development programmes in a number of African states.

    • Tarsha says:

      Personally I side-eye anyone who goes on about corruption as if it doesn’t exist anywhere else. Corrupt or not, it’s still better than no charities at all. I’m not saying there aren’t problems, but there is in everything in every part of life. Everything in life is corrupt in some way. I would rather have charities that are rife with corruption, than have no charities at all. What is your answer? Throw out the baby with the bath water? Shut down all charities because some/maybe all are corrupt? That attitude is part of the problem, not part of a solution.

  22. Sunny says:

    Hiddleston’s Sierra Leone trip was “successful” as he was joyfully vocal about the honor of his experience and his fan girls regularly raise money in his name for donations (in hope he’ll personally recognize them).

    I often think that is the purpose.

    • TotallyBiased says:

      Well, yes, his fans have a constant fundraising effort going for Unicef (that has exceeded $100,000, so, you know, not bad) but saying everyone who donates is doing it in hopes of getting some attention from him is a bit much. That said–he has recognized the fundraising as a whole several times, which is rather good followup from him.
      His fans have also been inspired by him to participate in Live Below the Line, the Ice Bucket challenge (donating), and the EB Tonguetwister (donating.) So, there’s been beneficial results to those charities from his attentions. I’d say donations and media attention/general outreach are what Unicef and others are looking for from the average celebrity supporter visit.

      And btw, he didn’t go to Sierra Leone. He went to Guinea, West Africa, to highlight Unicef efforts against widespread malnutrition, lack of vaccines, and access to clean water.
      http://www.unicef.org.uk/UNICEFs-Work/Our-supporters/Celebrities/Tom-Hiddleston/

  23. TOPgirl says:

    Celebrities are the biggest brats ever except for Saint Ange. I love this woman!

    • lisa2 says:

      I love Angie too.

      but to be fair there are so many celebs that are doing some amazing things for many causes. I support that. What I hate are the ones that jump on the bandwagon then when the cameras go away they go away too. Look at Haiti, Katrina, so many other. Working on a cause may take time. Longevity.

  24. Guest says:

    Guardians AIM was to BASH Angelina and they still weren’t able to dig up any dirt about her Humanitarian work even from ground level field workers, that’s got to hurt them LOL. She has been doing this over 15 years and still people are trying ti bring this good women down SMH. Why cant they accept her work as genuine instead of trying to throw shade at her. There aren’t that many genuine people out there that care and spend their own money on these causes but still media wants to drag them down on their good work.

  25. sassy says:

    doesnt’ say there the conference was but http://www.un.org/press/en/2014/envdev1457.doc.htm

    says Fan Bingbing read a poem?

  26. lenje says:

    #1 my guess is Salma Hayek.

    #3 I can’t help but think it was Bill Clinton. I don’t really recall Leonardo visiting Aceh.

    #5 the up and coming actress… could it be Kate Bosworth? (She was in that movie about surfing, no?)

    #6 I suspect this is Yao Chan. She spoke at the UN Climate Summit back in 2014 so there’s possibility she was also invited to a UN conference on water. IIRC, she’s involved with UNHCR.

    (EDIT: I stand corrected, it was Li Bingbing who was at the Climate Summit, not Yao Chen)

  27. Jenna says:

    Blind #3 is Matt Damon.

  28. Zigggy says:

    #1: Salma Hyak?
    #4: Jude Law?

  29. meme says:

    I think I’m beginning to truly admire Angelina. Her and Brad really are better than a lot of dumb celebs out there.

  30. naturegirl says:

    My Lady!….:-) Proof there is none more golden.

  31. boredblond says:

    It’s a fine line..I remember there was a concern that a summit with AJ about rape (I think in the Congo) cost far more than the money spent on the problem ..now that’s not her fault, but it does illustrate that the u.n. is a very expensive organization and maybe there’s a better way to do things.

  32. Sara says:

    I’m impressed with Beckham, he sounds so low key and kind. As always Angie is a great role model for young women. I just love her.

  33. Lola119 says:

    This was an interesting comment:

    Anonymous223 1 Jul 2015 21:05

    I’ve worked in the aid industry for over 10 years and from my experience this article is spot on. Most of the actresses were more concerned about their appearances than the issues and one even wore daisy dukes and a crop top to visit a children’s center in a very conservative South East Asian country. Their PR people would always expect us to spoon feed them sound bites for upcoming interviews. I’ve seen a lot of my words in big magazines. Colleagues of mine have complained about celebrities touring disaster zones with them only to spend their time “getting the shot” of these celebs with the disaster in the background. Other celebs have conveniently gotten involved in our work following bad press for something they allegedly did or said. I’m actually surprised by the feedback the writer has presented about Ms. AJ. I have crossed paths with her on multiple occasions and I would describe her as cunning. One would hope that catering to these celebs narcissism would benefit the charities in some way but unfortunately in my experience there have been one too many broken promises. As for the charities themselves I would have to agree with JohnAshworth (although I too am posting this anonymously) . A lot of these charities are dysfunctional and we do know it. In my experience this is the result of poor leadership within the charity itself. But what’s the alternative? The aid workers themselves get paid nothing, get zero credit and put themselves in harms way. But they do it for the right reasons and as a result a lot of good comes out of it.

    • lisa2 says:

      NOT sure about this.. the UNHCR is not a “charity”. And Angelina has her own charities she supports through her foundation. I don’t see her doing charity events and such as a norm. And if you are going to call someone out be specific.. and this comment is not.. Just a quick dig with nothing to support it.. and this is talking about 2 different things.. Charity events and Refugees at camps..

      • Lola119 says:

        Maybe I read it wrong but where does it say anything about charity events or refugee camps?

      • lisa2 says:

        My point was Angelina is not showing up at charity events. The UNHCR is not a charity persay. And she pays her own way when she travels. She goes to refugee camps. And the people there are not fleeing war zones and abuse.

    • Neil says:

      I’m not registered there but if so would have loved responding to this person. I would have questioned his bonafides and due to his use of vagaries (cunning?) and non specific charges, would have accused him/her of sounding more like a disgruntled bureaucrat, than a field worker with intimate experience there in. Sounds like he/she conducts himself anonymously in real life as well.

    • A says:

      Thanks, Lola119
      Just what I suspected, not surprised by miss Holy or any other celeb frankly.

      • Tarsha says:

        Charming. Sounds like bitterness and resentment to me. It’s also interesting that you paid attention to one negative comment and not the actual aid worker in the story, nor the many others that say she is genuine. It seems you ignore that mountain of evidence and zero in on the one vague one that supports your preconceived view.

  34. K says:

    I posted a while back (a year, maybe?) to say that a friend who worked in this field said exactly that about Angelina Jolie. She told horror stories about other celebs by contrast, too (but wouldn’t give me names, so I can’t share anything of interest, sadly!). I’m not surprised.

    • BNA FN says:

      For a person who you described as cunning, Angelina Jolie Pitt has spent approximately 15 years of her life doing something that she is not really dedicated to is such a waste of her time. I belive you have no idea what cunning means. Such a shame for someone who is not doing anything to help others to make disparaging comment on someone who more than a third of her life helping others. I would like for you to tell us what have you been doing for the last 15 years to help others. I know the answer will be cricket, cricket.

  35. lurker says:

    Angelina is the real deal