Jennifer Garner: ‘I did not participate in or authorize’ People Mag’s cover article

You know what would have been nice to see on the cover of People Magazine this week? A tribute to the Manchester victims and maybe an interview with Ariana Grande with details about her planned benefit concert. That’s breaking news though and People must have been hoping for a lull this Memorial Day week. Hence this really stale-seeming story reinforcing the points we’ve heard ad nauseam about Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck’s split – it’s hard on her, he was the love of her life and she’s not ready to date. The Vanity Fair interview she did last year was interesting and we learned some things, this just reads like a rehash of all their PR planted stories, with the angle of focusing solely on Jen and if she’s ready to move on yet. Spoiler – nope.

Jennifer Garner is settling into her new life as a single mom.

The actress, who filed for divorce from Ben Affleck on April 13, is “doing okay,” an insider tells PEOPLE in this week’s cover story. “This has really been the most difficult decision for her. But it’s time to focus on the future.”

Garner, 45, and Affleck, 44, who each asked for joint custody of their three kids, Violet, 11, Seraphina, 8, and Samuel, 5, continue to effectively co-parent together, according to sources.

While Affleck lived in the guest house on the couple’s L.A. property since he and Garner announced their split in June 2015 after 10 years of marriage, the actor has now moved to a nearby home to remain close to his family.

“They want to be sure the kids are comfortable,” says a source close to both. “It’s all in step with what they’ve always said was the most important thing: their children.”

Between her family and career — Garner has three upcoming films, Wakefield; The Tribes of Palos Verdes, which she stars in and executive-produced; and Simon vs. the Homo Sapiens Agenda — the actress hasn’t begun to think about dating again just yet.

“She will eventually, but it will be a while before she does,” says the insider. “She’s certainly not jumping up and down and screaming, ‘I’m single!’ and planning dates. She still says Ben was the love of her life.”

[From People]

I was ready to take Jen to task for letting this play out for so long and for continuing this narrative that she’s the sweet devoted wronged mom, but what if she had nothing to do with this? I would find that hard to believe unless I heard it from Jen herself. She posted the following on her verified account on Facebook. This is unprecedented for Garner. She doesn’t do social media and I was assuming that her people and/or Ben’s people were behind the countless sourced quotes about them in the celebrity press. Apparently not this time at least. Here’s what she wrote:

That was really well put and I believe her. She handled that well and I like that she’s trying to keep it in perspective. So this begs the question: is she changing tactics now and trying to dampen down all the stories about her family and when did the narrative get away from her? At what point did the press just take the story and run with it? Many of us assumed that Ben and Jen were blanketing the press with these stories, and they may well have done that and continue to do that as needed, but this plants the seed of doubt now. In a way it’s genius because it makes them seem like victims of the gossip press when they’ve been using it to their advantage for so long. It seems similar to their relationship with the paparazzi.




photos credit:

Related stories

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

68 Responses to “Jennifer Garner: ‘I did not participate in or authorize’ People Mag’s cover article”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Tiffany says:

    Sure Jan.

    • INeedANap says:

      If she was smart she would become some high-powered PR agent and give up her dwindling acting career. She has a brilliant mind for shaping narratives and many others could use her skills.

    • minx says:

      LMFAO! Was just going to say.
      Their marriage/divorce has been so tiresome and they both milked it. Just divorce and shut up already.

    • Cynical Ann says:

      This exactly. There are far more high profile people who’s kids we never see, and know almost nothing about.

  2. Clare says:

    They used a really weird photo of her on that cover…she is really quite attractive, but that photo is so terrible!

    • KB says:

      If they’d used a photo from some red carpet I don’t think she’d have addressed it at all. It’s the fact that the photo looks posed. She prefers it look like she’s not chasing publicity, the tabloids just chase her.

      The quotes are the same as they’ve always been, but the photo makes it look like she’s in on it, so it’s off-brand for her. I still think she’s behind all the stories, this cover just made it look like it was officially authorized. She’d rather have the deniability of “oh, those tabloids just care so much about me! They’ll find me in Timbuktu!”

      • Anon33 says:

        THIS. I don’t believe for one second that she wasn’t behind it. GMAFB.

        Edit: I see someone posted People’s response down thread. The fact that they are not backing down strongly indicates that she was involved.

      • ok says:

        Well what are they supposed to say? Yeah, we know our source is bullsh-t and we made it all up? Their statement isn’t that strong.

      • Anon33 says:

        If they didn’t have quotes from her, they would be retracting. That’s how it works. Especially since she’s “used” them before. I think it’s incredibly telling that they’re NOT kissing her ass with an apology. Ymmv.

      • ok says:

        From the parts of the article that they’ve put up on their site, they aren’t saying that they have quotes from her in the first place. It’s all from sources.

      • Original T.C. says:

        If it’s just from Sources and it’s not anything outrageous like ‘she secretly abuses her kids’ why even take the time to address it? Sometime about the story cuts a little too close to the truth and really set her off IMO!! She is making the story bigger than the original superficial fluff story People was selling. Weird.

      • greta says:

        Because they went out of their way to make it seem like she gave them an interview and posed for an exclusive. She didn’t. People Mag is supposed to be better than other tabloids but isn’t. Most reading the article would believe it simply because it’s People Magazine.

  3. Rianic says:

    She looks like Juliette Lewis here.

  4. OSTONE says:

    Really unprecedented, as People is the most celebrity-friendly outlet and usually what they print is celeb-certified.

    • ok says:

      That’s how they used to be. These days they just print junk from “sources”.

    • hannah89 says:

      in the 1990s, maybe.

      now they’re just known as Kneepads (get down and suck celebrity d**k for exclusives)….or (White) People…these are the jokes about them. they are so outdated, it’s kind of sad. they even named julia roberts most beautiful woman (it’s 2017, not 1999). you see middle-aged obese white women eating them up in doctors offices and pharmacy areas to wait. very sad.

  5. OhDear says:

    Even if she didn’t authorize the story, it doesn’t seem like a smart idea to throw the hand that feeds you under the bus.

  6. QQ says:

    They love to use the press when they have a campaign for a role or a marketing blitz to telegraph devoted happy mom and dad in the farmers market V V Nice people ( with sad shoes- Yes Toe Condition we know, sis) and I don’t for a second doubt all those leaks served to position her both in terms of a divorce/possibly patching up with her Saggy Batman/post divorce that she wasn’t gonna be F8cked with there were options etc.. but now “is intrusive” they played this same game when he was campaigning for Argo and after there were all the interviews about the privacy invasion

  7. Original T.C. says:

    Well she hasn’t denied any of the will they or won’t they break up stories or nanny-gate, just the usual “is she pregnant” stories that she and Just Jen 1.0 use as Strawmen arguments while pretending they don’t use the gossip press when it serves them to do so.

    Just wait Jen 2.0, People magazine will throw you under the bus soon enough!

  8. Luca76 says:

    Is she a client of the Huvanes by chance? It seems like someone close to her was writing this narrative for her.

  9. Keely says:

    I’ve tried to like her (okay not really), but I really dislike her brand and the segment she caters to but one has to admit she’s good. She plays the game so well, it’s tedious to watch mostly but when she gets it right it’s glorious . IMO people mag has these relationships with celebs they like, but they also take liberties and fabricate stories when it suits them. I have no trouble believing she has been leaking to tabloids ad nauseam but also can believe people lied this time.

    Garner would get more respect from me, if she were more honest about the game she plays and owned it or at least dropped the “dimple parade butter wouldn’t melt in my mouth” persona and was a straight up boss in control of her life and narrative.

    • OhDear says:

      People say that about various (female) celebrities (see also Taylor Swift). But the female celebrities who have been open about their ambitions get smacked down (see Alicia Viklander).

    • QQ says:

      I See you Keely! I see you and Nod to you, That’s how it is for me, She is so Bland boring ON PURPOSE for a specific set of reasons, and she does it well, but let’s be out in the open with it

      • Keely says:

        Riiight QQ, like why go out of your way to be so bleh and meh?? You’re clearly a smart woman in control behind the scenes…own that. I agree @oh dear society has a problem with ambitious women I call it “how dare she titis” I’m not well versed on Vikander and generally ignore Taylor- I find her problematic in so many ways & it has nothing to do with her ambition.

    • Merritt says:

      As usual women cannot win no matter what they do. If they play the game they get criticized and if they don’t then they get criticized.

      • Shannon says:

        This. You can’t win either way as a woman sometimes. She seems extraordinarily inoffensive to me in every single way, and yet some still find a way to hate on her. I don’t get it!

    • LA Elle says:

      Jen is insanely savvy. If I were suddenly famous, she would be one of my top people to talk to about managing fame. I don’t always agree with her PR tactics, but I think she’s chartered a smarter course than a lot of her peers.

      She does the rom coms and other fluff but also quirky independent movies. She seems to gravitate towards quirky projects, but she’s never once dissed her mainstream projects (see: Meg Ryan) or belittled people who enjoy those projects. She supports women’s rights and hasn’t shied away from feminism or addressing sexism in Hollywood.

      So, yes, she is hyper aware of her image, but she hasn’t let that stop her from addressing issues that matter to her, including a few that aren’t particularly popular with the Minivan Majority. As Shannon said, it often feels like women can’t win, and I can’t help but admire Jen for attempting to find a middle ground.

  10. Lady D says:

    She really doesn’t look comfortable in the dark blue dress.

  11. HeidiM says:

    Is People one of the magazines that was involved in the major buy out recently with the dramatic change in writing staff? Lainey has been talking about that recently and that we would see a dramatic change in the stories for gossip mags because many of the writers and therefore there sources are no longer affiliated with those magazines. Im just wondering if this would explain why Jenn is so comfortable now calling out People.

  12. ok says:

    Both People and Enews posted fluffy, from-sources Jen and Ben articles yesterday. I’ve speculated that they have the same source as many of the quotes seem to be too similar (fluid relationship, blah blah). The People article may have said “moving on” but the actual angle of it seemed to be that she was still hung up on Ben and WASN’T moving on. Guess she took offense to that. She’s got a new guy, I’m telling you.

  13. Nicole says:

    Eh I’m not mad at her for blasting them for an apparent exclusive. Esp people which is the celeb friendly mag that always gets the PR scoop. So they may have shot themselves in the foot with that one.

    • Carol says:

      By putting her on the cover, it gives the impression that this was a sit down exclusive interview with her. If it were just a small article inside the magazine, I think she would not have said a word!!!

      • Lucy2 says:

        It definitely does give that impression, so I can understand her saying something about it. I believe she has certainly used the media in the past, but still has the right to call out something like this.

  14. Erinn says:

    I don’t think it’s ridiculous to think that not EVERY piece about a celebrity (even in a fluffy celeb-friendly magazine) is coming directly from them. Honestly, how many Taylor Swift articles were there talking about her boyfriends and how obsessed she is, and how this one is ‘the one’ – even if a portion of them WERE caused by the celebs agent or whoever giving some info to the writers it’s not like it’s hard to write fluff pieces that are in line with the ‘usual’ narrative/track record completely out of nowhere. Pretty much anyone on this site could have written a little mini ‘scoop’ about TSwift, or Ben/Jen or Angie/Brad without ACTUALLY having any specific source info. Just keep it in line with the ‘usual’ headlines, be vague enough that it’s believable, and voila – yet another piece. Let’s not pretend that the gossip mags are different from a regular business -they’re still only interested in grabbing people with headlines, getting clicks, selling magazines, etc. If it looks like they have something brand new (even if it’s not) people are going to read it.

    I feel like Jen is one of those celebs who does use the paps and mags when it suits her – but I bet she thinks that will prevent too many BS stories from being written. Give them some material here and there, maintain a friendly relationship with them and at least it’ll be under her control for the most part. If someone decided to go ‘rogue’ with the material that’s getting printed, I can’t really blame her for being annoyed – especially if she’s managed an upfront relationship with them beforehand.

  15. Joni says:

    They’ve been printing rubbish for a while now, and It’s about time someone called them out on it. They’re the ones that reported the divorce was off literally right before they filed, LOL.

    Whether it was accurate or not, I think she was more bothered by the narrative of the story – that Ben is still the love of her life and she has a hard time moving on etc. It made her look really pathetic.

  16. JoJo says:

    What I find interesting (if you can call it that) is why she chose to call out this article, and only this article, and at this point in time. There have been literally thousands of stories written about these two since their split – almost all of them doing exactly what People did in this case, which is using unnamed sources. She’s never said a word. Was she suddenly offended by the narrative that she just can’t get over Ben? (Not a new narrative, so why does she care now all of a sudden?) Would she have let this go if it wasn’t the cover story? I do believe she/her team have been behind not many, although of course not all, of the stories in the past, so I do wonder what prompted her to take this unprecedented action all of a sudden.

    • iop8 says:

      The article made her look rather pathetic, imo. I saw several other webloids generate articles of the “Jen still in love with Ben” variety, based specifically on the People article. I think she must really be tired of that and trying to distance herself.

    • LA Elle says:

      It’s makes me wonder what’s going on behind the scenes.

      I’ve heard and read stories / rumors that PR teams will sometimes trade a positive story for one client to quash a negative one about another client. Given Jen is no longer the wife of an A-List actor, part of me wonders if someone thought they could use her for a bait-and-switch, and she’s not having it.

      But I’ll also admit everything going on at the White House has me in conspiracy mode.

  17. iop8 says:

    It seems like all tabloids print stuff from “sources”. They have been getting away with it, too. I wonder how this will affect the BS that People Magazine in particular prints about Garner.

  18. QueenB says:

    Im always surprised when people close to celebs believe even crazy stories. Probably easier to say from the outside.
    But why would anyone believe that Jen Garner now is carrying twins? Well unless you are Louise.

  19. greta says:

    While I agree that Jen and Ben (and their PR staff) have used the tabloids and the paps to their advantage in the past, I also feel that at this point, it’s too easy for tabloids to get clicks inventing anything and everything about them. I could have written the People article and I obviously don’t know them. Look at the Daily Mail creating articles literally about nothing based on Jen’s daily coffee and gym strolls. This is just revenue for them. Jen’s PR team especially has stayed busy denying stuff via Gossip Cop. Something about this particular article made her want to speak up, and I think it was the whole “she’s not dating and STILL calls Ben the love of her life” angle that they took. It made her look sad, pathetic, mopey, etc. and I don’t think that’s the narrative that she actually wants anymore, especially since he’s dating.

    The AP posted this: A People spokesperson says in a statement that its story on Garner “is fair and truthful,” adding that “it does not include rumors and does not say she’s pregnant.”

    • Lisa says:

      Well, People Mag, I disagree. Unless it’s coming out of her mouth it’s including rumors. And the only one who can say what’s true or not is her or Ben. Nobody, even friends & family know what my relationship with my husband really is except him and me and that’s true with everybody’s personal relationships not just the famous.

      • Carol says:

        One thing that was consistent with the “sources” was that they were not reconciling.
        And obviously that was true since they both filed!

  20. Merritt says:

    People magazine has been trash for a long time. Just look at the number of sympathetic articles are covers they have given the Duggars.

    • minx says:

      That’s what finished them for me. They tried to make the Duggars sound like just a wholesome big family instead of a female-repressing cult.

  21. The Original Mia says:

    She’s straight up telling people she didn’t pose or grant them an interview. People has been trash for awhile now. They’ve been usurped by social media. There’s still a market for them, but it’s a cut throat world and those actors/celebs that will play with them are in stark contrast to those that won’t.

  22. Marianne says:

    It is possible that People just used quotes from various interviews or their “sources”. The photos could have been from other interviews as well. Photos that they are already own the rights to.

    • Carol says:

      Yes that is exactly what they did!!! If they had used one of the more common pics that all the rag magazines used , I don’t think she would have responded. I wonder where People got that pic? I wonder if she recognizes that pic from anywhere? Or if she even does?

  23. Tina says:

    People Magazine has not had the most accurate information about the divorce. US Weekly seemed to have the correct scoop. Over the past 2 years, I thought People was more Ben’s soundpiece. I don’t doubt they have their sources, I just don’t think their Jen’s. US Weekly has been remarkably quiet for a while. I agree with other news sources that think there is a bigger story just sitting out there. With the 2-year anniversary coming, maybe it will finally break. Amicable split at this point? I highly doubt it. Maybe the girlfriend is the source.

  24. LearningtheSystem says:

    Did anyone notice the article about Ben Affleck that appeared on the same day on the People website? It was somewhat flattering to him, how he is working on himself, maintaining closeness with the family with early breakfast before school and how people would be surprised at how close he and Jen remain. Those are new “facts” wouldn’t you say? The article on the cover was full of non-news and repeated quotes about Jen, but slanted to make her appear as if she is still hung up on him and is struggling to let him go. Coincidence? Or someone else’s strategy? I don’t think the amicable is strong here either.
    As noted above, People has always seemed to be his mouthpiece. Just pondering.

    • Tina says:

      I noticed the odd story about Ben too. It mentioned him flying across the country often to see the kids. I thought it hinted at him not being able to see them as much when he starts filming Batman? Kind of convenient to already be excusing his upcoming absences. The People article was not for her benefit. They are finally divorcing, why would she want people to think she is still heartbroken? Especially if she is dating someone…

    • Carol says:

      Will the article about Ben be in a different issue? Was his done before or after the article on Jen?

      • Tina says:

        There was an article on Eonline (I think) that was more in-depth than the People article. It appeared after the People articles.

    • Ana says:

      Ben ‘s camp is suspect. This is a game. He is in Congo this week. We have not seen him doing his pap strolls with the kids.

  25. coconut says:

    @Celebitchy, Did you see that The Cut/New York magazine quoted you in this post today at 10:54am ET?

  26. JoJo says:

    I like Lainey’s take on this. Jen’s reaction seems somewhat suspect – particularly when People has run so many stories exactly like it since 2015, with a cover photo, similar wording (“Jen’s heartbreak”) and unnamed sources. Is this part of a post-split rebrand effort?

  27. greta says:

    ^Lainey’s take seems to be that ol’ Jen threw People under the bus for a publicity stunt and some attention.

    • Ana says:

      Something big is going on behind the scene. Otherwise, she would not have denied the People issue. Odd. Some camp is trying to make her look pathetic. This was released while Ben is out of the country.

      • brooke says:

        Ben has used her (and their kids) for years to make himself look good and help his career. Many pap pics of him tagging along to the kids’ outing but he’s shown to be staring at his phone in the background while Jen is engaged with the kids. He’s still trying to use her and I feel like that’s why she’s shooting down this latest pathetic-Jen story. She’s so done.

  28. brooke says:

    I think Jen is done playing media games with Ben. She may not have cared about false articles like these before they actually filed, but now that they have? She’s not game for it anymore. Between the nanny, rehab and the divorce, Ben is in dire need of image rehab. Whether it’s him or it’s Warner Bros, someone wants to make him look good even if it’s at Jen’s expense. I think that’s what’s behind her facebook post. She’s letting everyone know that she’s done being part of his image repair process. YMMV.

  29. Jenfan says:

    Is Lainey tiring to say she is actually seeing someone else?

    • JoJo says:

      I just took it as Lainey saying it was an opportunity to turn a “nothing” story that would have died quickly if she left it alone into more buzz, keeping her in the news, etc.

  30. Jenfan says:

    A Washington post analysis piece ponders the question – if Garner has now broken her relationship with People Mag – what will People do with all the “dirt” they have on Ben and the divorce – that as a celeb friendly outlet – and garner and affleck ‘s go to publication – they have not printed for more than two years.

    Now that will be interesting and makes this more interesting if this is a Jen calculated move.

    • Tina says:

      Whatever happened between them to finally end the marriage must have been pretty awful. I think this is her way of reinforcing that she is done protecting him and his image. She is definitely re-branding herself – it would be foolish not to. People Magazine was insisting the divorce was on hold when US Weekly was emphatic that she was about to file. In the end, TMZ broke the story. His announcement that he went to rehab came from Facebook as did her disavowal of this latest cover story. His side is still using People but she is not. It is just a matter of time now until the dirty laundry hits the news. It seriously makes me wonder if the nanny is still involved.

    • Carol says:

      Do we know for sure that People has “dirt” on Ben?
      I would like to think that Jen would want to protect their children.
      I feel bad when any marriage ends.(celebrity or not). I am around Jen’s age & my husband & I just celebrated our 19th wedding aniversary.