The Hot Blog

What happened? Somebody finally found out what that movie was you said was so bad you wouldn't name?

Easy to be glib...

You're not the real father of Jamie-Lynn's baby are you?

Dave, it's a question of character: either you have it or you don't. Fortunately, you have it, my friend - so the question of breaking news is not as important to you as the responsability you feel about the actual lives involved in the matter. And that's beautiful.

Two weeks from now (maybe two days), no one will remember who actually "broke the news", but the person who did will have to live with it for the rest of his (or, should I say, her) life. And the people affected will remember who did it and will resent him (her) forever.

So, as usual,your ethics will not only prove your fortitude but will also preserve you and MCN.

And that's what matters in the end.

I haven't seen any broken news yet..

what's the word? or where can I find this "gossip" item??

Hopscotch, nothing against you, but I think your reaction was the same as mine: if DP isn't reporting it, it must be juicy! Driving up the anticipation.

Which is to say, I don't see that this post serves any purpose except to make people curious, which is not what I think DP had in mind. I've said this before and I won't say it again: best to have just not said anything at all.

Not the mob thing Anne posted during the afternoon?...

Pretty sure, J-Mc, there is nothing you've said in here that you won't say again... and again... and again...

And Hopscotch... last time I wrote about a situation like this, it took about 4 months to "break." This might take as long or longer.

DP, I thought it was worth pointing out. I think there's another, less flattering motive to this post...but in the same spirit, I will not say what it is.

Karl Rove outed Valerie Plame?

The Tuna jilted Atlanta for Miami?

Last time it was the Wachowski sex change thing, I believe. So this is another situation like that?

Tancredo dropped out because he was banging Larry Craig?

This is DP's way of "breaking" a gossip story that will be big news without actually *breaking* it. In other words, when it breaks, he can say he knew about it and posted first. Ah, the race to be #1 in the blogosphere .

Well played, Mr. Poland. Well played.

WTF???

Please, either post it. Or don't. Or post a one-paragraph chain yank (just so we know that you know what some other "jackal" will soon be telling us but that you won't tell us because you're too principled, or conflicted or what not). But, oy, don't lead us through 11 paragraphs of "to be or not to be" nonsense only to leave us hanging.

What a tease.

You have done this before, and Petaluma couldn't have said it better.

Higgy sounds like the guy in the limo with Heather Graham in Boogie Nights...

You guys are pathetic.

You come to this blog and presumably everywhere else on the web seeking only the sum, not the work. And as a result, we are surrounded by people don't do the work and feed the maw with nothing but punchlines. And there's no accountability because by the time the punchlines prove false, y'all are all too over it and on to slowing down for the next car wreck to notice that corrections are never run or even acknowledged.

I'm not exactly a wilting flower. If you want to know how I think or what I think, ask. If you want to tell us how I think because you think you know better than me, shut up... you are making an ass of yourself. (And if you can't understand me when I explain, sorry... live is that way sometimes.)

Someday you guys will actually have something important to you at stake in your lives and you won't think it's a game. And some idiot will tell you that what you feel doesn't matter. I've already made the choice not to worry too much about the peanut gallery. They/You have nothing but their temporary self-amusement in mind. And while I enjoy tsa on most days of my life, it is not what I sustain myself on.

I'm confused by this entire thread.

What a ridiculous thread. "I know something you don't know". And then masquerading non-reporting as ethics while basically encouraging people to find out whatever piece of gossip it is you're trawling. One of the lamest pieces of blogging I've ever seen.

Gee... how exactly am I "encouraging people to find out whatever piece of gossip it is you're trawling," oh person whose handle I don't recall ever seeing here before?

Is my standard for choosing what to publish supposed to be whether people will act like bufoons in response?

Do you really think that knowing something you don't know is novel to me?

Just wondering...

I will cop to this post being odd, obscure, self-indulgent as personal expression and a bit provocative. But ironically, it is proving its ultimate point with these responses. Many of you can't see past whether you are being serviced with today's junk food, regardless of whether there is an issue of ethics involved.

Those who have nothing to say apparently do nothing but attack the messenger... which I wouldn't mind if the attacks were substantive. I just don't understand when people argue that they would rather be 100% ignorant than engaged in a discussion of principle, which does not require sordid details in order to be valid.

Maybe is was Don Murphy unbusying himself or Anthony Pelicano passing gas.

I still really want to know what that really bad movie was. Other than that I don't care this way or that what rumours are going around about Dave or anyone else in his circle.

"Is my standard for choosing what to publish supposed to be whether people will act like bufoons in response?"

No, the standard for choosing what to publish should be something that meets a level of interest about movies or the film industry, not 11 paragraphs of "I know something you don't know". And there's no sense in leaving a thread open for comments and then criticising those "buffoons" who take the time to do so.

"Do you really think that knowing something you don't know is novel to me?"

Grow up, you don't even know me.

"I will cop to this post being odd, obscure, self-indulgent as personal expression and a bit provocative."

It's none of these things, so don't flatter yourself; it's just utterly trivial.

What I don't understand - and maybe it's just me - is that you put a thread like this up, something which has nothing to say, and when readers criticise it for its pointlessness, you suggest that all we want is to be "serviced with junk food". That's not what I want. I'm not particularly interested in the gossip you're referring to. I just want to read something interesting and informative, that's all. Crazy, I know.

^^^^^^ what that person said ^^^^^^^

I could give 2 shits about gossip and ironically, the last 2 juicy tidbits of gossip I was turned onto (the Jeff Wells/Vinessa Shaw thing and some tripe about Nikki Finke) came from this blog and from you, DP. I actually had to spend 5 minutes digging around to find out what everyone was on about. I guess you're the bigger man in all things trivial and gossipy, unless they involve the Wells-Finke Bi-Axis of Jackassery.

It's absolutely your blog, your world, your words and you can do whatever you want. But as has been pointed out to you ad nauseam, don't have such a hissy fit when someone calls you on being lame.

So what's the rumor again? Now I want to know.

I think this is a matter of expectations. Is this a personal or a professional blog, or is it both? DP is treating it as both, which is why this particular musing is not satisfying the "just the facts, ma'am" crowd.

I think this is a matter of expectations. Is this a personal or a professional blog, or is it both? DP is treating it as both, which is why this particular musing is not satisfying the "just the facts, ma'am" crowd. That, and people in general do not like to be teased.

Sorry for the double post. And remember that blogs evolved from online diaries.

In case you haven't noticed, Dave likes to comment on the industry from "the outside". He's talking about how a harmful piece of gossip will inevitably make itself known, due to the nature of the media. Morality and good judgement are at play, but are not strong enough to prevent this gossip from getting out. It's an interesting commentary, but apparently lacks the "content" you all so crave.

Nikki Finke is getting a sex change?

Martin, it's the content that is there that's the problem, not the content that isn't there.

Just a wild guess...whatever caused Owen Wilson's suicide attempt was caused by another actor's actions or some variation. If it is, I hope it stays buried. Ethics are seriously on the wane. Why is it ok for paparazzi to take photos/video of stars in their private life when their kids are around. I don't blame Brangelina and others for getting pissed off at these actions. The search for the almighty dollar trumps any civility towards a person's private life.

A big trick to avoiding the paps is to stay away from LA or NYC.

Brad and Angie ask for it.

If you don't want your kids to be photographed, don't arrange deals with the media to have them photographed. Even if the money goes to charity, the act itself subliminally invites the media to photo the tykes.

Have you ever seen or met a Paparazi? Nine times out of ten, they are an ex-con trying to make a buck by doing something "legit".

Their moral standards are iffy.

One of the reasons I read this blog is *because* it is a mix of reporting, analysis, and opinion, but I am always (OK, usually) able to tell which hat David is wearing when he's posting a particular article. If this were just a reporting column, he'd have never posted this.

My only question would be this: if you were not asked not to make this public... would you have made it public to begin with? And why? If it is just a piece of personal gossip, well, this isn't usually a gossip column.

The way I see it, and I mean no disrespect to Dave,

This is about bragging rights. When this story breaks, which it sounds like it definitely will, this is about Dave being able to say:

"See, I knew about it the same time or before everyone else, I just CHOSE not to report it. But as you can see by my blog post on 12/20 you can tell I clearly knew about this way before it broke. Therefore, my journalistic in's into the film industry are not any less penetrable than anyone else's..."

It probably was better to have not said anything at all.

Thing is, THX, there have been literally dozens of such opportunities that I have never taken. And in the few pieces like this in the past, I have never ended up acknowledging the event or film when it ripened (and inevitably died). But you will believe what you like.

I got out of the "who is getting fired/who is getting fucked" game a few years ago. It's scummy and rots your soul... for those who are in it who still possess the option on their soul.

No one asked me not to write about it, JB... but someone warned me not to write about it. It is directly related to a business story, but in the end, no one will be helped by it becoming a public issue... those it will damage are already in a world of hurt... though one would never know that from the outside, as it is wished.

Every once in a while, I need to release a primal scream in here, just to remind myself that it is still a business of human beings and not clawing animals.

"Every once in a while, I need to release a primal scream in here, just to remind myself that it is still a business of human beings and not clawing animals."

That is understandable, and a completely valid gesture considering some of the shit I've seen go down in this town over the last year.

I agree with THX. If DP had just said 'primal scream' in the first place I wouldn't have bothered him. The posting read more like 'look at me not posting' than 'I can't stand those who are about to post'.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: