We were thoroughly confused yesterday by the feud that erupted between model/heiress Lydia Hearst and the Post. Why would the tabloid's gossips alter Hearst's Page Six Magazine column to make it look like she was trashing her family, then release a column preview exposing their fabrication to the world?Something seemed fishy. And indeed it was: The self-proclaimed socialite "journalist" has had her columns ghost-written all along. SHOCKER!
"Cohesive" being a relative term.
At least some of these interviews were conducted via email, so Hearst may still try to claim to have "written" her columns. But when one person is asking questions and another is answering those questions, there's not really any question as to which is the journalist and which is the writing-challenged minor celebrity.
Worst for Hearst is that the emails constitute written proof she was dissing her family, a fact the Post is exploiting gleefully, quoting the heiress as follows:
I do think [Hearst Corp.] should cut back on events, but it is a bit sever [sic] to cut back on the Christmas party, that's like the joke in the Scrooge films where the holiday parties and bonuses are canceled.
You know, if socialites would just content themselves with being socialites instead of insisting on pretend day jobs that help them feel modern and fulfilled, Hearst would never have sought to brand herself a "Freelance Journalist" and this whole kerfuffle could have been avoided.