IUC Editorial: TV Stations Wrong to Boycott Senor Andrew Morton

Posted on August 1st, 2010 by HisHighness in IUC:Bits, IUC:Entertainment

Me with Morton and Dawn Olsen

Me with Morton and Dawn Olsen

It’s quite the cycle and I hope media outlets wake up and take quick note of this. A blatant example of unreasoned, borderline unlawful and disgusting censorship is being put on a couple of distinguished colleagues of mine. First TV stations huddled together to boycott Kitty Kelley’s expose on Oprah Winfrey. Now, my old friend Senor Andrew Morton is feeling the chilling effects of a concerted media campaign to protect Brangelina. A new shielded media loop that is improperly balanced has been created to protect Hollywood’s A-List. The world deserves to hear what Senor Morton has to say about his new tome. If Brangelina wants to dispute it let them go head to head with Morton on Larry King or The View. Harping about Morton’s unfair treatment by the media might not be futile. A source who works for NBC told IUC there has been great concern about what’s transpiring against unauthorized biographers. “I think the tide will turn shortly and you’ll see the networks covering unauthorized works like they used to,” the source told IUC. “Right now the trend is against giving people like Morton a platform. Butt the networks have to wake up and realize people at home watching want to hear the dirt on public figures, not some sugar coated account by the celebrities who make everything sound like paradise.” (The Independent)

  1. Kate said on August 1st, 2010 at 3:51 pm

    I agree, this is outrageous. I have seen certain hosts on one of those network shows bold face lie about some of the info they put out as I watched knowing exactly what they were told to say. Very very disturbing. On another show when one guest accused Jolie of being a liar the host was so upset he changed the subject. I don’t know if the network is forcing the hosts to behave that way, or they are truly that much of a butt kisser and that naive, and that dishonest. If they are going to boycott authors, any author I don’t care who it is, then the shows that do it, show reap the same reward. Let them feel the crunch and Brange and can then send them a check for their loss. No integrity, and if they are only going to whitewash every star and use it as a public relations platform for stars they need to run a ticker telling the viewers that.

    Reply
  2. Pattyanne said on August 1st, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    Well put Kate. It’s shocking to realize the power the Brand appears to have in controlling the media. I have given up watching Access Hollywood, and Entertainment Tonight because both have proven to be Jolie/Pitt butt kissers. Do they truly think the viewing public is that ignorant? Just digging themselves a deeper hole.

    Reply
  3. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on August 1st, 2010 at 5:43 pm

    SO RUPERT MURDOCH IS TRYING TO PROTECT HIS INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY IS HE? Quelle surprise! Or maybe she just offered him a BJ round the back of the bikesheds too – who can really say?

    All I can say is: dignified Angelina, really, really dignified. If you’re going to go down, go down like a cat trying to scratch it’s way out of a dirty old bath tub won’t you? Then take the night bus home and go rub yourself down with all that dirty old cash won’t you. TOTALLY SHAMELESS.

    Reply
  4. I'm on the bidet said on August 1st, 2010 at 5:58 pm

    Considering how much television stations are owned by companies that also own movie studios, its probably easier than we think for a successful celebrity to say to them “don’t cover bad news about me at your media outlets, or I won’t work for your movie studio”. And corporations aren’t going to shoot themselves in the foot by bringing negative publicity to a movie in which they’ve invested $100 million.

    ‘Salt’ is distributed by Columbia Pictures, owned by Sony, so no Sony outlet is likely to air bad AJ news, and ‘Wanted’ was from Fox, so probably the Fox Networks agreed to something as well. Since Universal Studios is using AJ for the next Kung Fu Panda movie, and they General Electric owns both Universal and the NBC media outlets, I doubt you’ll see them beating her up either. I’d bet all major celebrities have something standard in all their contracts by now stating limitations on publicity.

    If you look at a list of who owns the major media outlets, its really not that many groups you’d have to deal with; the list below is outdated but you get the idea:
    http://www.nowfoundation.org/issues/communications/tv/mediacontrol.html

    As long as a celebrity doesn’t do something really stupid that goes public in an irretrievable fashion (e.g., an arrest), then via a few lines in their contracts with the major studios, an AJ type can probably see that a Morton (or a Halperin!) doesn’t get a lot of press from the major outlets. I’m not really a conspiracy buff, but this just makes sense to me that corporations won’t allow one of their subsidiaries to hurt another.

    Reply
  5. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on August 1st, 2010 at 6:38 pm

    @I’m on the bidet:

    I think she was probably a safer investment at the time that Salt was greenlit. She is a much more shaky prospect now I would have thought. Hence the lack of deals on the table.

    Reply
  6. Kate said on August 1st, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    @I’m on the bidet:
    That makes sense, but those Entertainment Shows are all fluff, and Fox Entertainment was bashing Angelina like tennis ball last week so I think it depends on what is being promoted. The book will still sell because all the other magazines will quote it and this make back fire and make people wonder, what are they trying to hide? I was not going to buy it for a long time, wait until all the hype passed and later on read it , but since they are trying so hard to suppress it , well thank you Angie. I will have one of those to read.

    Reply
  7. Lizzy said on August 2nd, 2010 at 10:33 am

    Dear Ted:
    What’s your opinion of Ian Halperin? He seems to ride the coattails of your Blind Vices, outs celebrities without any valid proof and constantly plugs his own “tell-all” books and movies. Is this guy legit, or nothing more than a shifty fraudster?
    —E

    Dear Imitation Is Flattery:
    I know very little about Ian, personally, only that he’s been very gracious with me the few times we’ve spoken.

    Read more: http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/the_awful_truth/b193085_bitch-back_whatrsquos_dirt_on_garrett.html#ixzz0vSX6jU2Z

    Reply
  8. Lily said on August 2nd, 2010 at 10:55 am

    Watching Morton interview about Jolie on MSNBC as I type this.

    Reply
  9. Butthurt said on August 2nd, 2010 at 10:59 am

    Oh please! Morton was good enough for the networks when it came to the Diana book. Controlled media. What part of that don’t you people understand?

    Reply
  10. Susanna said on August 2nd, 2010 at 11:20 am

    Boycotting the unauthorized biographers is such BS. I hope Morton’s book gets a ton of publicity, and I hope that Angie offering to sleep with him in exchange for painting her in a positive light didn’t happen, otherwise, who cares about the boycott….

    Lizzy, I saw that “shout out” to Ian on Ted C’s site – very cool! Although I am annoyed at Ted C for kisssing Fake a la Ferocity, er…I mean Angie’s butt right now, I am assuming to “support her” and her latest crapfest, Salt.

    Ian, I am excited for the Angie blockbuster today…don’t keep us waiting like you did all day Friday! ;)

    Reply
  11. colour said on August 2nd, 2010 at 11:32 am

    I don`t see were the problem is. Morton isn`t going to die poor one way or another! People who are interested in his book are going to buy it anyway. And the networks have to make a choice wether they want one morton interview for the price of not getting the next 10 exclusive Brangelina stories. Well their choice. And by the way if anyone wants to read horror stories about celebrities InTouchweekly is glad to help out bahaha!

    Reply
  12. joanne said on August 2nd, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    This is why I believe the right wingers are behind Jolie, they own most of the media and it only mentions Jolie if its somewhat positive. If this was Aniston it would be plastered everywhere. If Jolies movie was a success we would be tired of reading about it and seeing it on TV. Aniston had 2 number one movies in a row and no one really mentioned it. Thanks to Jolie I have no faith or trust in our Goverment.

    Reply
  13. alif said on August 2nd, 2010 at 3:30 pm

    And this is just a preview of what our society is coming to, in my opinion. And it’s the opinion of professors of history, as well, which is more substantial.
    History is there for us to study. The manipulation of the populace. This world is getting riper and riper for a dictator, the worst in all history, to arise! Again, our opinion, based on history!

    I’ve said this before. If your’e going to write an expose, don’t advertise it to the universe! Write it, and have it published. Then it will be done, and no one will dilute the product with their toxic manipulations.
    JMO!

    Reply
  14. Mindy said on August 2nd, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    this is awesome. AM is not getting the attention he wants for his book. Hooray!!!!! these entertainment shows know a sleez bag when they see one. just because you and AM didn’t get what you want it doesn’t mean Brangelina owns the media. you book tanked and so will this one.

    Reply
  15. cna training said on August 6th, 2010 at 12:46 pm

    My cousin recommended this blog and she was totally right keep up the fantastic work!

    Reply

What do you think? Join the discussion...

How do I change my avatar?

Go to gravatar.com and upload your preferred avatar.

Categories

Posts By Day

August 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jul   Sep »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Meta