Comments on: STAR'S BRITNEY SPEARS' COVER PHOTO SCANDAL!

By: Mark Pasetsky

Mark Pasetsky — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:38:27 +0000

Hi Martin,

Perhaps, we should have said a company spokesperson.

Next time we will certainly use your name.

For the record, we were certainly not trying to give the impression that we have a “mole” inside Star.

My question remains. What was the exact date of the pictures?
Mark

By: Martin Gould

Martin Gould — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 04:58:19 +0000

Scandal, where’s the scandal?
Your reporter called me and asked when the pictures were taken. After double checking, I took the trouble to call her back and tell her.
She asked if she could quote me my name, and I said ‘yes.’
But rather than be honest about your source, you report it as coming from an “insider” — as if you have a secret mole inside Star — so you can give the impression that we are trying to hide something.
I won’t stoop to use the word “pathetic” as you have, but is is certainly disingenuous on your part.
It is you who is tricking readers, not Star.
Martin Gould
Senior Executive Editor,
Star Magazine

By: Mark Pasetsky

Mark Pasetsky — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:10:10 +0000

Hi Misch,
Thank you for your comment.

The issue I have with Stars’ cover is that they used a “newsy” photo, which makes the reader feel like Britney was just on the beach. It’s a simple point but I believe one worth pointing out.

Thank you again.
Mark

By: Misch

Misch — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:56:36 +0000

I have the most deepest respect for your work, and you are right to be upset. BUT:
1. Tabloids making up false headlines : THAT’S NOT NEWS.

2. Britney Spears’ diet : THAT’S NOT NEWS.

I’m sorry to say, but you failed to deliver any news whatsoever in this post.

Although there might be some people out there that really care about this, so I’ll give you that.