This author says it’s not a bad idea to pay for celebrity tot’s photos. She says it’s a safer way to allowing the world to see the child rather than having the paparazzi chase down the parents and child.
But heck, Angelie Jolie and Brad Pitt’s twin’s photos are going for $15M to put into People Magazine? Wow, that’s a lot of money and for what? To see some tot’s photos?
I have admit I read tabloids/trash magazines in line at the store, but I’ve never actually bought one. I wonder how these magazines recoup the money they pay out? Subscriptions? I don’t actually ever see people buying them, but they must be everyone’s dirty little secret.
Do you wonder why they pay so much for photos?
10 responses so far ↓
1 tom // Jul 31, 2008 at 3:47 pm
my wife has a subscription to People… her sister buys it for her every year for Christmas, and she loves it. The magazine makes money from subscriptions and ads. You’d be surprised how many people buy it through subscriptions and in stores… 43 million a week average… Plus their website draws 818 million page views a month. According to Time Warner’s Annual Report, People Magazine and Website accounted for 16% of Time Warner’s 2007 Revenue (roughly $5 Billion) or $800 million. So $15 million is a drop in the hat for those guys. They’ll probably make $20 mil off the whole deal.
2 tom // Jul 31, 2008 at 3:47 pm
as you can tell… i’m very bored at work today…
3 Meg // Jul 31, 2008 at 3:50 pm
I know LOTS of people who buy People, US Weekly, etc. I will look at them if the mags are sitting in a waiting room or on my friend’s coffee table, but I refuse to purchase those types of magazines on the principal of not supporting and encouraging our celebrity - obsessed pop culture.
But seriously those magazines RAKE in the money. The biggest expense is undoubtedly photos , but those usually aren’t that expensive. Every once in awhile we hear about these million dollar photo ops, but those are relatively infrequent - and apparently they boost sales so much that they are well worth it.
On a side note, why not sell your baby’s photos? The paparazzi is going to get photos anyway and sell them to the masses; why shouldn’t Brad and Angie get that $15MM instead of some sleazy photographer who runs in front of their car or something?
I would certainly rather structure the unveiling of my child’s image to the world myself, controlling the timing and setting, than leave it up to chance and put my family at the mercy of photographers who will stop at nothing until the first photos are obtained.
4 Jim ~ mydebtblog.com // Jul 31, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I personally could care less what a celebrity does. It’s beyond me why so many people care what goes on in a world they can never understand. The last thing I would want is fame for the sake of being famous.
5 LivingAlmostLarge // Jul 31, 2008 at 4:03 pm
In the article they mention that you can just pose for all paparazzi for free if you don’t want to sell the photos like Ethan Hawke did with his baby. Just held her up and that was the end of it.
6 Kristy // Jul 31, 2008 at 4:59 pm
But isn’t the money going to charity?
7 Livingalmostlarge // Jul 31, 2008 at 6:40 pm
For the Jolie-Pitt yes, but not necessarily everyone else.
8 MP - The Morphine Princess // Jul 31, 2008 at 10:43 pm
According to reports, Jolie-Pitt $$ is going to charity - but I wonder who will really get the tax benefit? Jolie-Pitts’ or People Magazine?
Personally, Jolie-Pitts, while weathly, are not among the SUPER wealthy - but they are spending as if they are. They are leasing the estate in France…. and the terms of the lease far exceeds their annual income. I can’t help but wonder if, in a few years, when they are old and grey, they are like the Ed McMahan’s of the world - used to spending, but not budgeting. (Although, I do recall Angelina causing an uproar because she wore a $20 dress to one of her movie premiers.)
9 Todd the Bod // Aug 1, 2008 at 2:37 am
In most instances if the paparazzi wants pictures of your baby selling them to one magazine is not going to stop everyone else from trying to get more “free” pictures. So no, it doesn’t really make anyone safer.
10 Zombie Money // Aug 1, 2008 at 9:00 pm
I could see tons of areas where money could be better spent
Leave a Comment