indiejourno.com » Vanity Fair

Toothless Tiger’s Topless Picture

MajorDomo — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 03:20:21 +0000

Vanity Fair's February issue has a shirtless Tiger on the cover; the pictures were shot by Annie Leibovitz who unloaded $24 million in debt thanks to the pictures

I know, I know, I promised to not write about Tiger Woods anymore..but here is one more promise broken.

February’s issue of Vanity Fair has a piece by “Friday Nights Lights” author Buzz Bissinger, that describes Tiger’s efforts at maintaining a scrupulous image, all the time he was fooling around with those other women.

As with most of the pieces surrounding the Tiger Saga, the fun is in the juicy details and the piece recalls an old interview with Tiger – in which he made more than a few profane jokes. Like this one- “He rubbed the tips of his shoes together and then asked the women, ‘What’s this?’ They were stumped. ‘It’s a black guy taking off his condom.’”

Errrr…hokaaayy!

Read the whole piece at Vanity Fair.

While the piece is normal celebrity tripe, the extras lie in the pictures taken by debt ridden super-photographer Annie Liebovitz.

She shot a bunch of hot pictures of Tiger Woods four years ago – doing man stuff- i.e crunches, lifting weights and the like. The pictures, reportedly went into her secret archives. Now that she finds herself in debt – a whopping $24 million – she dusted those topless pictures of Tiger, sold ‘em to Vanity Fair and is probably paying off her creditors. Go Annie! Milk the saga for what it is worth! Plus, you can finally pick up your home phone again!

Ah gossip! Like water for fishes.

Mumbai Massacre – Bracing for the Anniversary

Smriti Rao — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:32:43 +0000

A reporter talks on her cell phone outside the Taj Mahal Palace and Tower on November 27, 2008, hours after the terrorists struck. By Arko Datta/Reuters/Landov.

November 26th would mark the one year anniversary of the carnage in Mumbai, when armed gunmen from Pakistan rampaged through the city by the sea indiscriminately shooting innocent people and taking two five-star hotels hostage.

There was so much that was gruesome about that attack. The sheer brazenness, for one. The fact that someone could just hop off a boat and start shooting into the crowds.

Then, there was the media coverage – with the Western outlets focusing on the attack as targeting Americans and Britishers and the Indian media falling all over each other, trying to outscoop each other; revealing sensitive information and hampering rescue efforts as they dragged on over 60 hours.

In the end, 117 people were killed in the attacks. Died before their time, because some doped-up, impoverished extremist from a remote valley believed that this would, in some way, be tantamount to achieving whatever it is that he set out to accomplish.

PBS is due to broadcast Secrets of the dead: Mumbai Massacre – a documentary based on the testimonies of those who survived the attacks. It is due to air November 25th. Check your local listings. If you don’t live in the United States, you can always catch the documentary a day after its broadcast on the PBS website.

“This film offers an unprecedented, inside view into the attacks,” says Jared Lipworth, executive producer of Secrets of the Dead. “It not only reveals how the victims and terrorists acted during the massacre, it highlights how consumer technologies and social media gave the victims a chance to survive, while also putting them directly into the line-of-fire of the terrorists who were hunting them down.”

The film, made by Australian Elizabeth Pitt, is heart wrenching.

Watching it made me relive the anger and horror I experienced as I watched hour after hour of the non-stop TV coverage of the attacks. I remember being glued to the TV set, ranting on Facebook, G-chatting with friends back home, and checking Twitter for updates. It’s also amazing to note technology’s role in this attacks. From the Perpetrator’s side – there was the use of cell phones, satellite phones, GPS systems and on the Victim’s side – it was text messages from cell phones, blackberries, and I-phones. Nowhere before, have the predators and prey been so wired. It’s chilling to think of how information was used as a weapon and as a means of escape in this incident.

I am not sure what lessons India learned after this attack. But a hat tip to the crazy chaotic nation for not going to war with Pakistan, despite its security being blatantly breached by its rogue neighbor.

For more, read Marie Brenner’s “Anatomy of a Siege” in Vanity Fair (a piece that focussed only on the Taj and its survivors, prompting author Mira Kamdar to quip “It’s almost as if Ratan Tata commisioned this piece.)

Sex At The Workplace – Ex Letterman Employee Spills Beans

MajorDomo — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:31:34 +0000

David Letterman leaves the Ed Sullivan Theater, in New York City, after a taping of Late Show, July 29, 2009. By Ray Tamarra/Getty Images.

You know the saying – never dip your pen in company ink? No? How about, never crap on your doorstep? No?

Well, you have heard both expressions now and can use it in polite company on what the act of sex does to professional relations. Especially sex with your collegues or superiors. The long and short (haha) of sleeping with someone at work is that a) someone will eventually discover it and b) they will credit your success to sexual favoritism. Mostly though, even though you may be thoroughly enjoying the act, it is thoroughly unprofessional. That is pretty much what one ex-Late Night employee had to say about David Letterman’s affairs at the workplace.

In a piece in Vanity Fair, Nell Scovell writes about the hostile, sexually charged atmosphere at Late Night with David Letterman – the show where she worked briefly as a writer. Scovell said Letterman didn’t ”hit on her” during her roughly five-month stint with the show in 1990.

Without naming names or digging up decades-old dirt, let’s address the pertinent questions. Did Dave hit on me? No. Did he pay me enough extra attention that it was noted by another writer? Yes. Was I aware of rumors that Dave was having sexual relationships with female staffers? Yes. Was I aware that other high-level male employees were having sexual relationships with female staffers? Yes. Did these female staffers have access to information and wield power disproportionate to their job titles? Yes. Did that create a hostile work environment? Yes. Did I believe these female staffers were benefiting professionally from their personal relationships? Yes. Did that make me feel demeaned? Completely. Did I say anything at the time? Sadly, no.

Scovell quit Letterman’s NBC show, because she saw ”I was not going to thrive professionally in that workplace. And although there were various reasons for that, sexual politics did play a major part.”

When Letterman asked why she was leaving the New York-based show, she says she considered telling him the truth but balked because his ”rumored mistress” was within earshot. Instead, Scovell writes, she told him she missed Los Angeles.

”You’re welcome back anytime,” Scovell recalls Letterman telling her.

David Letterman’s sexual dalliances with his co-workers came to light after a CBS News producer Robert J. “Joe” Halderman tried to extort $2 million from Letterman to keep the lid on an affair Letterman was having with Joe’s girlfriend, Stefanie Birkitt. (This sentence is too long.) Letterman still has his job, Halderman pleaded “not guilty” to the extortion charge, and Birkitt is apparently “mortified” by the whole thing. But more than the sordid affair itself, the Letterman saga brings to light sex at the workplace and how that can horribly distort workplace power and politics.

[Video] Sarah Goes Rogue!

Smriti Rao — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:51:22 +0000

Hey, anyone hear where Sarah Palin is these days? Nope?

Well, the former Alaska Governor was last seen in a grainy video on news networks – as she addressed a group of business leaders in Hong Kong. After that, zip! Nothing!

According to Newsweek, she’s laying low, turning down interview requests and speaking appointments. A new Gallup poll released in the last few days shows her approval rating plunging to 40 percent – that’s the lowest number she’s had since John McCain tapped her to be in his Vice Presidential running mate in August, 2008.

So, what is she upto these days? Perhaps she’s gearing up for a big flurry of interest once her memoir, aptly titled, “Going Rogue: An American Life” comes out in book stores next month. Then there will no stopping her yakkin up her book at stores, shows and a billion interviews. Maybe she knows she already has a winner on her hands. Merely two days after Harper announced the publication date of former Governor Palin’s book, it ranked number one on Amazon.com’s and Barnes and Noble’s websites. Huffingtonpost says she finished the book just four months after the book deal was announced and the release date was moved up from Spring 2010 to November 17th.

“Governor Palin has been unbelievably conscientious and hands-on at every stage, investing herself deeply and passionately in this project,” said Jonathan Burnham, publisher of Harper. “It’s her words, her life, and it’s all there in full and fascinating detail.”

Full and fascinatinating detail reminds me of the Todd Purdum piece in Vanity Fair, a couple of months back. The report, entitled “It came from Wasilla” detailed the former Guv’s absolute randomness and her mule-like obstinacy to not do anything she didn’t want to . “The pattern is inescapable: she takes disagreements personally, and swiftly deals vengeance on enemies, real or perceived.” That description, kind of flies in the face of what her ex son-in-law, Levi Johnston had to say in “Me and Mrs. Palin.”

In that piece, Levi describes Sarah Palin as someone who padded around at home in sweat pants and watched bridal shows on TV every chance she got! So, will the real Sarah Palin please stand up? Or do we have to wait till the 17th to get a peek into Sarah Barracuda’s life?