Interestingly, an AP story came out yesterday as well (09/03), quoting various 60 Minutes correspondents (Morley Safer, Leslie Stahl, Steve Kroft) about how even that esteemed program is having to accept dictated terms and conditions in order to get the prize of an exclusive celebrity interview. Kroft: "It's made doing these interviews a little more distasteful for all of us. It's turned us all into shills."

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Manhattan, a number of older generation "name" newspaper gossip columnists present an objective front but many will tell you that, behind the scenes, they are in fact in full cahoots with publicists and celebrities in order to gain regular access to quotes and scoops. Ultimately, maybe Christy's sin was not the fact that he bent the rules of engagement, but rather that he got caught (?).

Uh, Brian, I think Christy's sin was taking money and undeserved benefits from the very same people he was supposed to be covering objectively. The "dictated terms" that 60 Minutes and others cave to are things like agreeing that certain topics are off limits or giving a celeb the right to edit a cover shot, etc. Neither one is something to be proud of but Christy crossed some lines that the other's haven't.

Mr. Ricey, fair enough. I was trying to relate Christy's apparent transgressions to the overall sliding ethics of today's tabloidized entertainment journalism field, but maybe drew the circle a little too wide :-).

Perhaps the Hollywood Reporter should hire Jayson Blair as their new society columnist. After all, what better way to tap the insecurities of Tinseltown than to comment on parties without actually attending them?