Strollerderby : celebrity gossip

UPDATE: Jamie Foxx Apologizes To Miley Cyrus

Brett Singer — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 03:30:00 GMT

Jamie Foxx issued a mea culpa on The Tonight Show With Jay Leno. EOnline.com reports that Foxx responded with a "Yeah" when Jay Leno asked him "Did you say something inappropriate?" Here's the rest of it from EOnline:

"I so apologize to [Cyrus], and this is sincere...I am a comedian, and you guys know that whatever I say, I don't mean any of it. And sometimes, as comedians, as we do, we go a little bit too far. I have a radio show...We're really the black Howard Stern. We go at everybody. There was a situation with Miley Cyrus, and I just want to say, I apologize for what I said. I didn't mean it maliciously. You know I'm a comedian."

Then, looking at the camera, "Miley, I apologize, so I'll call you. I got a daughter too, so I completely understand."

So there you go. Good enough? I think so. Do you agree?

Original post follows below.

*-*-*-*-*

So, like, hey now.

A little background. Jamie Foxx has a channel on SiriusXM Satellite Radio where he does a show called The Foxxhole. He said some... things about Miley Cyrus (aka Miley Ray Cyrus Hannah Montana Stewart Lipschutz). Someone called in and mentioned Miley's little dustup with Radiohead (she wanted to meet them, they said no, she got pissy and yakked about it on some radio show). The Oscar-winning Mr. Foxx then went off a bit. Here's the audio, which is not safe for work. At all. Seriously. You have been warned.

So yeah. He said it. There are a few other people in the mix, and I'm not sure who said what. I'm fairly certain it was Jamie Foxx who said that Miley should make a "sex tape", and then a female voice added "with your dad." "White bitch" was in there. Also something about doing heroin "like Britney" (I must have missed that headline about Brit nodding out), as well as a suggestion that Miley catch VD from a bicycle seat. (I didn't think that was possible, but hey, what do I know?)

A few things to say here. First, Foxx said this on his radio show this past Sunday. It appears to only be coming out now. That doesn't diminish it, but it does mean that not a lot of people heard the comments. Second, he was trying to be funny. That doesn't excuse the comments at all, of course. But in theory performers get more latitude when it comes to humor.

As for what was said: it was completely inappropriate and in incredibly poor taste. I'm not a fan of Miley's; I think her music is horrible, and the message of her entire persona seems to be that fame is a goal worth trying for, which is something I don't agree with. (That's the short version of a longer thought that I'll share one of these days.) In my opinion you can make fun of anything and talk about whatever you want. But when its an underage person, boy or girl, and you start saying "white bitch" and suggest that she make a sex tape with her dad, that seems unnecessary. He has the right to say it. But why would he? (A commenter at LATimes.com says that the Foxx clip is somewhat out of context, but, like the Rodney King video, I'm not sure that context matters in this case. Maybe it does, but I doubt it.)

There's also plenty to make fun of when it comes to Miley. The Radiohead thing. The fact that she sleeps in her parents bed sometimes, despite being sixteen years old. Her music. Her TV show. Lots of material to work with before you go to "white bitch" who should do heroin and make a sex tape.

What do you think? Should underage famous people be off-limits, at least in some ways? Or did Miley deserve it?

Source: EOnline

Image: Amazon

Miley Cyrus Does It, But Would You Let Your Teen Sleep in Your Bed?

Jamie Foxx Trashes Miley Cyrus On His Radio Show

Man Jailed For Spraying Urine On Food And Children's Books

4 Year Old Brings Pot To School, School Bans Backpacks

Girl Scouts Use Cookie Money For Soldier's Care Package

Is Miley Cyrus' First Photo Shoot Creepy?

Brett Singer — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:15:00 GMT

Miley Ray Cyrus Hannah Montana Stewart Lipschutz's first photo shoot has surfaced. The shots were taken back in 2002, and some of them are way creepy. At least that's my opinion. You may feel differently. Let's take a look, shall we?

Some of the images are fairly tame, even for kiddie modeling shots.

Then comes the belly shirt. And the quasi-pouty face.

Actually, I can't decide if this last one is a pout or a "Why am I doing this?" expression.

I'm not a big fan of putting your kids into the entertainment industry. There are obviously cases where the kid wants to do it, and sometimes the kid wants to do it and actually has some talent. But how does a parent participate in a photo shoot where their daughter is wearing a midriff-bearing t-shirt? I feel a bit creepy just writing about this.

Here's a shot with, I think, Miley's mommy.

Not sure if this was candid or staged. I’m thinking staged. She appears to be primping Miley Ray Whatever for the next shot. Either way it's… well, I can't come up with a better word than creepy. And I'm not sure I need to.

One thing for sure – the next time Miley Ray Cyrus Hannah Montana Stewart Lipschutz and her crew complain that Annie Leibovitz or some other celebrity photog somehow tricked them into a racy photo spread, we need not take that seriously for even a second.

As little girl role models go, Miley is certainly better than Tila Tequila or Britney Spears. But would you want your daughter dressing like this? And would you take pictures of it? This isn't JonBenet Ramsey creepy, but it's close. What exactly are you going for when you dress a ten-year-old girl (the age she was in the shoot) like this?

I know I’m getting all moral majority butthead on you. But what do you think of these pics? (Links to the full gallery, which is enormous, are below if you really want to see them all.) Creepy? Not creepy? Would you let your daughter do a photo spread like this at age 10?

Source: MileyWorld via OceanUp via Buzzfeed

Mark Wahlberg Thinks Britney & Paris Make Crappy Role Models

Yet Another Generation of Young Girl Popfatuations

Babble Giveaway: Win a LeapFrog Didj + Hannah Montana Game! (Ends 12/1)

Suri Cruise: Most Powerful Child On The Planet

Name Guru Picks Eight Worst Celeb Kid Names of 2008 (Part 1)

Name Guru Picks Eight Worst Celeb Kid Names of 2008 (Part 2)

Nine-Year-Old Lothario Gets Movie Deal

Cheetah Girls Banned From Macys Thanksgiving Parade

Brett Singer — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Fans of Disney Channel girl group The Cheetah Girls will be disappointed to learn that the trio will not be appearing at the Macys Thanksgiving Day Parade this year.

The reason? Semi-nude photos of Adrienne Bailon, who plays Chanel Simmons in the band/movies about the band/TV show about the band/something or other (I don't fully understand all of the identities involved here so forgive me) that have appeared all over the Interwebs.

Particularly weird is the possibility that Adrienne had a publicist leak the pics and then claimed that her laptop had been stolen. Jonathan Jaxson, a publicist and/or blogger, claims that he was hired by Bailon to release the steamy snaps (sorry, dropped into gossip-language there for a moment) so that Bailon could "distance herself" from Disney and start developing a more "adult" image. This story doesn't appear to have been confirmed by Adrienne or her people, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.

Many news outlets are comparing this to what happened with Miley Ray Hannah Montana Stewart Cyrus Lipschitz and Vanessa Hudgens (High School Musical), two more Mouse House mamacitas (ouch! Gossip talk! Stop that!) that had nude (Hudgens) or semi-nude (Cyrus) photos appear in the wild. But there are a couple of differences. First, Miley Ray Hannah Montana Stewart Cyrus Lipschitz was under 18, and some of the "controversial" photos appeared in Vanity Fair, and the ones that didn't certainly looked like they were candid cell phone snaps. Hudgens was just 18 when her nekkid self showed up on the web. Also, HSM's Hudgens (ah, I give up, gossip speak will happen on occasion) immediately apologized for the racy pics. So if it was a nefarious plot to let the entire world see what she looks like in her birthday suit, it was a well-hatched one.

Why does their ages matter? Because teenagers do dopey things sometimes. So do people in their mid-20's, but if Bailon, who is 25, actually did have someone release these pictures on purpose, she's a huge dummy.

I know this is becoming a trend, but I have mixed feelings about this story. On the one hand, who cares? On the other hand, I would have preferred not to have to explain to a 7 year old what a DUI was when Yankees pitcher Joba Chamberlain got pulled over a couple of months ago.

Today on the Howard Stern Show on Sirius XM Radio, Robin Quivers theorized that some of the young actresses on the Disney Channel are so desperate to be uber-famous that they'll do anything to get there. If it turns out the photo thing was a leak and not an accident, I'd say she's right.

Should Macys keep the Cheetahs out of the parade? After all, one of their members may be have contributed to the downfall of civilization by putting out pictures of herself in a bra. (Or maybe not. Like I said, I'm conflicted.) More importantly, are they as popular as the amount of news stories about them would indicate? My kids don't want a lot of Disney Channel, but Hannah Montana I know about. The Cheetah Girls, not so much. Any fans, or parents of fans, out there in Internet land want to set me straight? Or even just explain the whole dual-identity thing?

Source/Image: Fox News

Suri Cruise: Most Powerful Child On The Planet

Malia and Sasha, Meet Miley

Matt Lauer Talks To Sarah Palin In The Kitchen

About Ann Nixon Cooper

Babble Podcast for November 17, 2008

Do You Take Your Baby Bar Hopping?

Alex Rodriguez Writing Love Poems To Madonna

Guy Changes Name to Captain Fantastic

Is The Incredible Flying Baby Video Real?

Sarah Palin Gets Pranked By Canadian Radio Hosts – Video

Rocco Ritchie wears Yankee shirt, Guy Ritchie weeps

Angelina, Brad & Brad's Porn 'Stache Do England

Jay Thomas Reunites With Out of Wedlock Son

Disney Pulls Hannah Montana Diabetes Episode

Brett Singer — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:15:00 GMT

Hannah Montana has managed to piss off a bunch of parents. But it wasn't with her music.

Apparently the Disney Channel pulled what was going to be the first episode of the new season because some parents who saw it early complained. "The episode, titled 'No Sugar, Sugar,' finds Hannah’s friend Oliver learning he has diabetes and was intended to teach audiences that the disease is one that can be managed." Some parents, "had concerns about how the disease was portrayed," although the New York Times article I saw doesn't mention any specifics. The title does sound a little bit jokey. (Maybe they were trying to revive Miley's dad's series "Doc".) But come on -- what did they do? Put a Snickers on a fishing pole and dangle it in front of a diabetic character?

One thing that "Seinfeld" was supposed to have taught us is that the "very special episode" is usually a bad idea. I'm not saying that it's not a nice thing for a show watched by zillions of tweens to actually try to teach a lesson now and then. But usually it comes across as forced. (David Spade, before he was famous, used to do a funny stand-up routine about "a very special episode of 'Family Ties'" where Alex is caught masturbating. "Aw Mal, can't you knock?") I've never seen Hannah Montana, but my guess is that people don't usually watch the show looking for issues-oriented television.

For that, everybody knows you should watch the new "90210". I mean, really.

Interesting twist: Apparently Nick Jonas is diabetic, and Miley Ray Hannah Montana Stewart Cyrus Lipschitz used to wear some sort of "diabetic dog tag" in support of the Jonas Brother that she either was or wasn't dating. (I can't remember and don't care enough to look it up.)

I do think it’s a little weird when a network yanks a show – in this case before it even officially aired – based on the complaints of a few people. How bad could it have been? I remember an episode of "The Brady Bunch" where Mike says to Carol, "If I ever caught one of my sons playing with dolls, I'd send him to a psychiatrist." (Cue laugh track.) My mother heard the line and asked me if I thought that was an OK thing to say, especially since I played with action figures, which are very doll-like. So maybe a better move is to watch the show with your kids and talk to them about anything you find objectionable.

Or just shut the TV off. But let's not get too crazy.

Source: NYTimes, EntertainmentWise

Image: EntertainmentWise

Malia and Sasha, Meet Miley

Woman changes her name to Cutout Dissection.com

Matt Lauer Talks To Sarah Palin In The Kitchen

Smokers No Longer Allowed Foster Children

About Ann Nixon Cooper

Oy vey, Miley showed her tuchas again

Brett Singer — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 19:00:00 GMT

I think we may be over-reacting just a tad to, like, everything Miley Ray Hannah Montana Stewart Cyrus does. (I know I've said it before, but this girl really does have more names than a Chekhov character.)

Now, I understood, a little bit, when people got upset about the Vanity Fair photo shoot. It seemed a little bit odd to be taking pictures of a 15 year old wearing nothing but a bed sheet. But sexualizing underage girls isn't a new thing for the entertainment business – Mandy Moore was 15 when she made "Candy" (here's the video), and Britney Spears was 17 when "…Baby One More Time" came out, with her wearing a skimpy schoolgirl outfit and writhing on the floor. Going further back, Brooke Shields was 14 in 1980 when she told the world that nothing came between her and her Calvins.

All of these examples, in my opinion, were sketchier than what's happening with Miley Ray Whatever. In theory, these were private photos that ended up in the public eye either by her own carelessness, a hacker, or, if you want to go with a total conspiracy theory, someone at Disney who sneaks them to the press. The latter seems insane, but who knows. No matter what the real story is (Miley's not returning my calls, so I don't know the truth) the photos themselves aren't that bad.

Now – they are photos of an underage girl in a state of semi-undress. Which makes them extremely creepy. So, somewhat like the "should Paps take snaps of Brit's kids in her own house?" question, what do you think about the never-ending stream of Miley photos? Do they mean she's "slutty" and a bad influence on America's impressionable young girls? Or is it, like, enough already, and should we listen to Dolly Parton and leave Miley alone?

image/source: GossipGirls

Old Jonas Brothers CD priceless

Jobs you don't want – Camp Parent Liaison

Teen Choice Award: Miley Cyrus

Teen Choice Award: David Beckham

Like OMG Miley Will Totally Babysit Ashlee Simpson's Baby!

Dolly Parton Tackles Britney, Lindsay and Miley

Readin', writin' and Dianetics?

Rich or Rehab: Whatever Happened to the Kid From 'The Black Stallion'?

Parental Confession: My Son Has Seen TMZ

Jen Chaney — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:03:00 GMT

I don't allow my son to watch six hours of TV per day. But I am as conflicted as this week's Pediatrician Poll about exposing children under the age of two to television. It probably would be better not to, but I can't always keep my fingers off the clicker when my 13-month-old boy is in the room.

He has seen some "Teletubbies" and an episode or two of "Kipper" (what can I say, the kid can't resist a dog with a British accent). But most of the Idiot Box interfacing has occurred as background noise; he's playing with toys or reading a book and glances only occasionally at the TV if it happens to be on ... unless we're watching a college basketball or NFL football game. Then he stares, open-mouthed, wondering how many years he has to wait until he can do the same thing while drinking a beer.

Anyway, all of this is a long way of getting to that confession: My son has seen TMZ. You know, the "news" program spun off from the celebrity gossip Web site of the same name.

To be clear, I don't sit the boy down in front of the set and say, "Okay, honey, time for the Britney show." He'll be fiddling with his blocks or that danged Leapfrog driving toy that repeatedly says "Out of the way!" when he beeps the horn, and I might click on the TV, flip around and pause on TMZ. Sometimes it's hard to resist. One time Jason Bateman was on. I'm not made of steel, people.

I do my very best not to linger on the show. And usually, my young ward isn't paying attention or even facing the television. But I worry. I worry that somehow all this seedy, gossipy nonsense might be seeping into his brain. I worry that maybe he'll start to value fame and attention above integrity and strong values. I worry that one day, in a few years, he'll look me in the eye and say, "Mom, I think Britney Spears is a better mother than you. Sure, she neglected her kids, went to rehab multiple times, often thought she was British for no apparent reason and flashed her private parts at photographers. But unlike you, she never let her kids watch a couple of minutes of TMZ."

On the other hand, I feel like the minimal TMZ time can't have done that much harm. Even if the exposure to David Spade's latest rant has an impact, it may not be felt until he's an adult. The way I figure it, here are the ways TMZ will eventually filter into my son's life:

-- For reasons he does not fully understand, he will name his son Adnan.

--He will develop a great interest in the life of Prince Von Anhalt ...also for reasons he does not understand.

--During his senior year in high school, he will be voted "Most Likely to Know A Bunch of Inane Crap About Paris Hilton."

--When he gets his first job and attends his first staff meeting, he will be sorely disappointed to discover that it doesn't involve standing around and telling the boss whose boobs fell out of her dress last night at Area.

--When he is asked to name the people who most inspired him as a child, he will say, "My mom. My dad. And Lindsay Lohan."