Celebrity gossip can be like a mine field. You have to sort out what's true and what isn't, because the one publishing the stories won't. They're in business to exploit the stars' fame in the hopes of upgrading their bottom lines. Sometimes they're right, but in many cases, they're wrong.
Today's case of gossip fact or fiction centers on Canadian-born singer Justin Bieber. According to a story making the rounds online and in print, a 20 year old California woman claims Bieber is the father of her 3 month old child, the result of a hookup in a restroom at the Staples Center in Los Angeles following a concert last year.
Bieber and his representatives, of course, were quick to deny the allegations, believing that the woman made up the story. The woman in question wants the 17 year old Bieber to take a paternity test.
It's too easy to simply say, she's making this up and doing it for the money. Not only that, but it goes against Bieber's squeaky clean image. It's bad enough some online haters accuse him of being gay just by the way he looks. That comes with the territory. On top of that, Bieber also has a high profile girlfriend in singer-actress Selena Gomez (The Wizards of Waverly Place), who's had her share of issues of late involving stalkers, as previously documented here. If it turns out that Little Ms. Baby Mama is in fact lying, and trying to shake down Bieber for a quick payday, the only thing she's going to get is jail time.
Meanwhile, the storybook wedding of reality TV vixen Kim Kardashian and NBA player Kris Humphries, who played last year for the New Jersey Nets, is over after 2 months and change. The tabloids and paparazzi who hound the sisters night & day got to be too much for Humphries to handle, as he's not used to that kind of attention. Now, stop for a second. The NBA is in a lockout, which also affects Khloe's husband, Lamar Odom. The tabloids aren't in a feeding frenzy over that pair just yet, only Kim & Kris, who wed in August, with the wedding recorded for the E! network. The Kardashian sibs, much like Paris Hilton, live for the sake of publicity, rather than do the sensible thing and actually work for a living. Paris' excuse, of course, is that she was born into a wealthy family with the virtual silver spoon. Kim's oversized butt has become a punch line unto itself, spoofed by Eminem, among others, and she's living off that, rather than try to live it down. Being in LA, it's her ticket to stardom.
The New York Post has gone so far as to claim the wedding was a sham all along, an accusation Kim & her mom have denied, not that it's ever stopped tabloid media before. It is tabloid media, after all, that has enabled the Kardashian sibs to continue their lifestyle, and let it play out in front of the cameras because it's the easiest way to get rich.
The problem here is that Kim knew all along the NBA was in a lockout. All she had to do, really, was talk to her brother-in-law. So why did the Star, on top of a fake cover headline claiming actress Jennifer Aniston had gotten married, claim Kim was after Kris to go to work? It's not like he's getting a job at Tiffany's any time soon. It's all about feeding the beast of public curiosity, for those people who live for learning every detail, no matter how minute, no matter if the celebrity in question isn't bound for immortality in terms of fame.
If Kim had any sense at all, and right now, I doubt that very much, she'd reconsider her career goals. Her problem is that in the course of 72 days, she was the only one getting income between her and her soon-to-be-ex, ignoring the lockout and the inability of Kris to make a living. Doesn't that qualify her as being, well, insensitive? Can't say for sure. As far as she sees it, Kris not working puts a damper on her, because it's not putting any extra money in her pocket. It wouldn't be fair to qualify her for Weasel of the Week honors, so we won't-----yet.
With apologies to a certain NBC show, in this writer's opinion, Kim really is the Biggest Loser because of that same lack of sympathy & sensitivity. Rather than stand by her man in a time of need, she'd rather stand by her pocketbook and her moneymaker. Real lame.
RE: The Justin Beiber issue:
ReplyDeleteOne DNA test will clear things up once and for all. If it turns out that he did father the kid, he'll be paying child support, and hopefully statutory rape charges will be brought against the baby momma. After all, she's 20, Beebs was 16-17 at the time of the alleged coupling so that shouldn't be ignored.
If it turns out to be completely false, she could be sued for slander and libel.
As for Kim K., it's my opinion the wedding was staged and it was a barely legal event to begin with. If a marriage license does exist, then the event was nothing more than a publicity stunt.
It's not unheard of in Hollywoodland; I've talked to people in the know who have told me that it's not uncommon for celebs to marry so they can have yet another reason to be the center of attention. They marry someone they're dating at that moment or make some sort of arrangement, sign the prenups, marry, divorce after a few years, and after getting additional publicity over the split, they go on their separate merry ways.
Kim K. doesn't have to worry about having a husband who's a breadwinner. Between the money she makes from her reality show, public appearances (a local Vegas niteclub paid her 50K to have her engagement party there), her recent boutique venture with her mother and sisters (which has a store open in Las Vegas) and her late father's trust fund she definitely doesn't have to worry about finances.
Of course, Vera Wang must be put out with her. She designed a bunch of Kim K. knock off gowns for David's Bridal and they were due to be in stores this February. I guess Kim couldn't hold off even that long!
Reports say that Bieber was 16, the accuser was 19. What kids like Bieber and Selena Gomez are finding out, the hard way, in fact, is that it doesn't matter what age you are, the sharks will come for you so they can get a lazy man's payday at their expense.
ReplyDeleteI don't follow the Kardashian E! shows, so I don't really give a rat's backside, I've said all I wanted to say.
What kind of parent would allow their 16 year old child to tour the world unsupervised to begin with. It doesn't say much for the people of this country or Canada that they are so needy for attention they are willing to cause permanent emotional damage to their children by putting in front of a world stage before they are even old enough to vote.
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm pretty sure Bieber, or any other child prodigy at his age, is under adult supervision. The record company will see to that if the parents are unable to accompany their son on tour.
ReplyDelete