The verdict is in: Nicole’s baby has outsold Christina’s baby. The issue with NIcole and Harlow sold 1.8m for People mag and Christina and Max sold 1.2m. Apparently, Christina was not happy about these low figures (even before she found out about Nicole’s baby cover besting her) and fired her manager and publicist.
Now, magazine “insiders” are pointing out that Christina never does well on covers and explaining the difference like this:
“There’s also a greater element of
curiosity with Nicole. She’s gone public about being a heroin addict.
Her boyfriend is covered in tattoos. By default, she’s got the more
interesting baby. People want to see how she settles down. They want to
see what kind of baby someone with her background has.”
Here’s what I think:
1. The whole thing is a bit yuck. Babies against babies? Perhaps it wasn’t the mothers’ intentions although Christina did specify in her contract with the magazine that no pictures of Nicole’s baby were to appear in the same issue as hers. Again, yuck.
2. The sales figures are not entirely fair. The other cover story on the Nicole issue of People (albeit smaller than Nicole but still prominent) is Angelina and the first photos of HER pregnancy. Angelina is gossip mag gold so I think it could be safe to say she would have helped lift NIcole’s sales. On Christina’s cover? A big photo of their nursery (!) which is approximately Care Factor Zero.
Personally, I find it hard to understand why anyone would buy either when you can see the pictures free on the internet!!!
FYI – Nicole’s pictures apparently
cost about half as much as Christina’s. But wait….do I hear something
about donating the giant fees – or even part of them – to charity?
Maybe to some of the kids who won’t be appearing on a magazine cover
any time soon and are actually not even getting regular meals or proper
health care? Nah, didn’t think so.
Top Comments
Although I'm not disputing the fact that Angelina helped the sales, I think cuteness factors into it. The cover photo of Harlow is way cuter than the one of Max, and therefore probably attracted more readers (not to mention all the teenies who bought it hoping there were photos of Joel doing the dad thing in it...)
There's definitely something distasteful about making money off the birth of your child, especially when you're not exactly in the poor house. If you don't draw the line here, then when do you draw it? How can you ever argue for privacy again when you've sold out your private life this much?
And I agree with you re. Angelina; it does sit better.
1) because of the donating to charity and this couple does so much work in that area anyway, and
2) because Ange and Brad (I so know them - great couple) will be HOUNDED anyway, so they may as well use the opportunity to steer some money to their causes.
With Christina and Nicole, I think they could have stayed more low key if they had wanted to. Especially Christina. I don't know why this woman would sell magazines anyway. She may be a greats singer, but where's the mystery with her? There's no X factor there.
This is the first time I've checked out your blog, Mia, though I do read you column in Sunday's Herald every week. You make me laugh, and that's always a good thing, isn't it?
:) Kelly