HA HA! OF COURSE she has!

I was def. on team aniston. But i do not think that angelina orchastrated her going to pakistan and everything, she is a very generous person with a giving heart and I do not think she did it just because she broke up jen and brad's marriage, and although i loove jen aniston i am begining to warm up to angelina

Duh!

It´s funny how someone writes the first silly thing that crosses his/her mind, and suddenly everybody talks about it defend that is true.

Oh boy, this post should be fun! I see a sh*tstorm coming!

I don't care about the "team angelina"/"team aniston" silliness, but I do think she orchestrates her image very carefully.

Then again, who could blame her?

When I read the NYT article (which I did yesterday, before this post) I didn't think it was unflattering at all. So I disagree with you there Pop. I thought it was more a description of how savvy and in control of her image she is, which I find remarkable.

"Conniving" and "manipulative" both carry fairly negative connotations that I think are unwarranted.

She's annoying, and I read the NY Times article and it does all seem you know . . . orchestrated like they said - but honestly, we've all done things we wish we hadn't and we've all wanted to re-invent ourselves and be that person we always wanted to be, who can blame her . . .I've done it and you know, who cares.

All smart celebrities manipulate their image... she just doesn't have a team doing it for her.

Yes, I think she definitely crafts and manipulates the media in portraying herself and her brood in a positive light.

She lets you know what she wants you to know. Nothing more, nothing less. Who could blame her? I wouldn't want the world to know every intimate detail nor sit there and defend each detail the press comes up with.

I think, to some extent, EVERY celebrity orchestrates their image!

Gee, pop. What took you so long to jump on this bandwagon?

yep - this thread should be interesting.

I read the article and (1) I think the NYT is threading into tabloid territory catering to the idiots who believe everything they read in the bottom feeder rags; (2) The article basically says that Angelina saves the 15% that all other celebrities pay their publicists (to craft their images for them) and still comes out on top.... how is that bad? Backhanded compliment, or perhaps a need for hits is what generated this article.

Angelina has been doing her charity work since she adopted Maddox (or before - not sure) so I doubt she does anything to change public perception, especially since she ignores all that gossip bs.

Ehm...isn't that what being a celebrity is all about? Angelina's media-smart because she has a high-profile media job; can you blame her?

I honestly don't know what to think, but this news isn't that suprising. All celebrities control their image to some extent. However there are two things to note:

1.) People magazine denied the allegations that Angelina had control over their editorial content. I believe them because I don't see how they would allow a celebrity to "edit" an interview...but I can see Angelina or Brad ruling out some questions at the beginning of the interview.

2.) I don't think that Angelina's charity work after Brad & Jen's divorce was staged. She goes on humanitarian trips on a consistent basis.

she needs to, all celebs need to. It's a way toget us to love them

Of cause she manipulates the media, all stars do but d*m I'm getting sick of hearing about the both of them. Charity is great but i do believe all stars gives to charities but don't have to announce to clear up there image. I really have no reason to believe Brad or Angie on anything they say anymore..There is no interest anymore.If anyone has a baby with brad everyone would excited. But I'm glad Jen didn't trap him to him him i a marriage. I have a lot of respect for her.

Ouch!!! This is exactly the image I have of her. Nothing but media wh0re. The article doesn't need to convince me of what I knew already.

Larry Hackett, managing editor for People magazine, just sent this email to staffers to address the recent NYTimes piece titled “Angelina Jolie’s Carefully Orchestrated Image”:

“I don’t normally address press stories about how we do our business here at People. But today’s New York Times pg. 1 story about Angelina Jolie requires a response. In the lede, the story strongly suggests that People, while negotiating for the twins pictures, had explicit conversations about our “editorial plan” and made ‘a promise’ that coverage would be positive.

“These sorts of stories have appeared in media gossip columns before. I have ignored them in the past as the unfortunate fallout of competition and sour grapes. But today’s story, in a much different venue, takes these rumors to a new level, so let me be absolutely clear: The suggestion that we have ever made any promise of positive coverage, or have submitted an editorial plan, is completely false. That I or anyone else would promise, on paper or verbally, to purposely slant coverage as condition for acquiring pictures, is insulting to all of us.

“Here’s what is true: Celebrities-and senators and business executives and athletes-are always trying to bend stories their way. We deal with that pressure every single day and engage in many conversations regarding all elements of coverage. Angelina Jolie is very candid about wanting attention for her charitable efforts, and we have covered many of them because we believe they are interesting stories. But in doing so, we have never relinquished editorial control. There have been occasions when her goals and our needs could not be reconciled, and we have walked away, as we have with countless other story subjects.

“In our coverage of both celebrities and everyday people, People certainly often celebrates their accomplishments and milestones. To say that our coverage of Angelina Jolie has not been admiring would be disingenuous. But the suggestion in today’s Times that this ‘positive’ coverage is codified and promised is totally bogus, and needs to be rejected.”

I have always found her annoying and just a little too goody goody but yet she comes off as some kind of sex-pot and then all goody goody again. I think Jen is better off without Brad. He sickens me too now. Used to love him, even when he was was Juliet Lewis(did I get that right?) and with Gwyneth, too. He just is so fake now and he morphs into whoever he dates. No real personality. Angelina...I think she does good work, but she does orchestrate stuff. What celeb doesn't? I still don't like her. Never have, never will. She just is annoying.

This doesn't surprise me because I thought most celebs have a team of PR people to arrange things for them anyway I never thought that she's manipulative or whatever since none of her peeps will be able to convince her to adopt and do many charity works to begin with.

You can't destroy Angie.

i don't think anyone can blame her for "orchestrating" her image. i think more celebrities do it than we realize. but there are still plenty of negative stories about angelina. her estrangement from her dad, her and brad supposedly breaking up every time we turn around, ect. i think she's quite smart and kudos to her for being in control. too many celebrities leave their images to PR people and sometimes that doesn't turn out so well. not to mention she was doing humanitarian work far before the media started reporting on it and even now there are trips and things that aren't reported on at all. I love her shes a smart business woman!

I read the NY Times article and felt that they were saying how savvy she is when it comes to her image. All celebrities want to control how they are portrayed but Angelina doesn't need a team of publicists to do it for her

i know a manipulator when i see one . Because im one myself when i need to
Still dont have anything against her .
you ppl must admit that alot of ppl manipulate for theyr own cause !

I know Angie's fans will all defend this practice saying all stars use the media to promote themselves, including Jennifer Aniston. True, but how many exploit refugees and orphans to do damage control when they get involved with a married man? Giving an interview to a magazine to promote a film is one thing. Exploiting desperate people in need of food/shelter and using your own children as leverage to make sure you only get positive news coverage is one of the most awful celebrity stories I have ever heard. Angelina Jolie is one of the most shameful, soulless people to ever work in Hollywood. And that's saying a lot.Charity means doing something nice for someone and not expecting anything in return. Can anyone actually say Angelina hasn't gotten anything in return for her charity work? Global fame, millions of dollars, glowing news coverage, getting out of that sticky little adultery situation. Ms. Jolie's fans must be really damaged if they think exploiting helpless people for personal gain is even considered an act of charity.

Bullsh*t!!!!! Angelina isn't a homewrecker and her charity work means alot to her. Its not a photo opt and Angelina Jolie is Angelina Jolie she doesn't have to tip off paps like some loser celebs do. Please. Thats BS!!!!!

Angelina and Brad always look so smug! I do admire charitable acts, but I feel like Angelina toots her own horn a bit...charity is best when it doesn't demand an audience.

exploit refugees and orphans? Are you kidding? So raising awareness is now being called "exploiting".
If she really did not donate tens of millions, which has been proven to be true, then you could use the term "exploit", however, there are some orphans out there , especially in Cambodia, that have been somewhat helped by her.

Also, yes, all stars WISH they had control over the media the way Ms. Jolie does. She is very smart and she can play the game better then anyone, but I really do feel her and Brad are truly in the top percentage of celebs that REALLY bring something significant to the table.

Also- Jennifer Aniston is ALL ABOUT THE PR. She is dying to be as good as Angie, but she really is not about much.

Of course, not surprising at all, how else can she delight in releasing her latest statement that she did get involved with a married Brad Pitt when she completely denied it in the beginning?

i just find this woman incredibly annoying.

even before she was with brad pitt, who also annoys me now.

brad pitt's like tom cruise 2.0 now!!

THAT'S who he reminds me of!
lol!!

Of course she does. All celebrities do (or try to, anyway). She just happens to be exceptionally good at it. Nothing wrong with that--if I was famous, I'd also be making a pretty damn big effort to make sure my public image was what I felt would be good for me and my career.

I read that she also takes care of all that herself, without a publicist, which I think is pretty damn impressive when you think about how ineffectual a lot of other stars at controlling their own images, even with professional help.

yes - i really do think that she does. i've been saying this all along. knowing the kind of person that she was 'pre brad' and knowing what she's like now - it's not possible to do that much of a 180 without having control over things to some extent.

ALL the celebs do things to get "good" pr. If someone is called "to skinny" they make sure paps take pics of them eatting at the newest hottest restaurants (or at least going in sided). If rumors are out there about someone cheating on their wife or husband. They make sure paps take pics of them with their family. Celebs need their fans to "like" them. If the fans are happy... that makes money for hollywood stars. When fans hate... they stop going to see their movies and stop watching their tv shows. Its all about MONEY...period! That's why A-listers stop putting the first baby pics on the cover of tabs. Most fans think its tacky. And its equal to pimping their kids on a street corner. But those same fans still want to see pics of their favorite celeb babies. So the new thing is to walk down the street. And let all the paps get pics or put it (for free) on the net themselves. Its all about getting and keeping "good" press or pr. So they can keep their career and keep the millions rolling in.

You call it raising awareness. I call it exploitation which is defined in the dictionary as "to use or manipulate to one's advantage". Feel free to look it up honey.

I believe Lara Dern would argue the "angelina's not a home wrecker" statement.

That's a definite yes. She has tried so hard to make herself look good after the whole stealing Brad Pitt situation. I think her motivation for her charity work is at least 50% selfish. And I know her fans will disagree - but she absolutely is a homewrecker. When you flirt with and start that kind of intimate relationship with another woman's husband, that's exactly what that makes you.

I had forgotten all about the Billy Bob/Laura Dern situation. She really is good at making people forget all of her bad deeds!

You can't take a man who doesn't want to be taken....period! Angie may not have respect for a marriage. But Brad was the tool who broken his marriage vows.

This has nothing to do with Angelina in specific, but celebrities and alot of wealthy people in general. They do alot of charity work in the public eye. These people are put into two groups, the people who do good even when they think nobody is looking, and the people who only do good things for good press. But one has to wonder if the people who do good when they think nobody is looking are just trying to alleviate guilt or feel they are absolved of their sins. Just a thought...

yes she is a home wrecker, she came into a marriage whether it be a healthy happy marriage or a marriage on the rocks, she should have had some respect for not just jenn but herself, but her history proves itself, of course she tries to manipulate everyone herself included, she wants the image of the good girl but her history proves other wise, i do think that she should be applauded for her humanitarian work and awareness but that's it, there are a lot of celebs and normal people that adopt over seas so i don't give her too much credit for that

hey scout00 "honey", my father worked for UNHCR at the ambasador level for 30 years and had the opportunity to meet Angelina Jolie twice in her capacity as the Goodwill Ambassador for UNHCR. So I know what I'm talking about when I say:

She was involved in their cause LONG before it became extremely public.
She donates $1mil to them for every movie she does
She is extremely gifted at connecting with both the refugees and the aid workers and she has done wonders to bring their cause to the public's (extremely short spanned) attention.

So don't spout on what you don't know about "honey" when you say she's exploiting refugees. She is instead exploiting the public's rabid fascination with her to a good end. Her humanitarian work DOES matter.

YES, SHE IS A MEDIA wh*re! Anorexic home wrecker!

I read the NYT article and have been waiting all day to see if Pop would post about this. And I believe every single word of the article, despite People's denials (of course they would deny it. Imagine if they would admit to that - every celeb would ask for the same thing in the future).
Selling out her kids and staging photo ops for the paparazzi.
I always thought that Angelina was a master media manipulator. I'm sure she cares about her charitable cause, but yes she does exploit them to make herself look good. Every time Jen has major press coverage, Angela tries to upstage her (be it with well-timed trips, contributions, tears, etc). So many other celebs donate time and money to charitable causes without issuing a press release each time, not Angie. She uses it all to her advantage and pursue that saintly image.

she looks all waxy ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think that would take more time than she actually has. She has a soccer team full of kids people - if she can orchestrate her ENTIRE image... the woman truly is a superhuman!

seriously she has a team of people taking care of her kids

no i don't think so. she has a wagon load of children, she is a u.n. ambassador, she does charity work like a work horse..seriously, if she was doing this just to look good, wouldn't she stop at a certain point? i think she is giving from her heart and that people who are saying that she is fake are really jealous! i mean not everyone looks good, has a nice heart, and is known for being extremely sexy.
don't hate appreciate.
furthurmore, i don't think she's being fake. or that her transformation is not real. i think she changed her whole outlook when she had children and i admire that. she's become the perfect housewife. there's nothing wrong with that.