Vogue's Snotty Reality TV Debut [Marketing]

Vogue has always acted disdainful of reality television. When it became clear the fashion title had passed on something big with Project Runway, Vogue editor Anna Wintour sniffed that her magazine "is not in the business of making entertainment out of the struggles of new designers." Fine. How, then, to explain Vogue's seeming reversal, its participation in an online reality show about the travails of three young models? With denial. "This isn't a reality show," cries the trailer. Other shows are "just amateurs live" Vogue publisher Tom Florio told the Wall Streer Journal, while this one is co-produced by modeling agency IMG, which makes it totally legitimate. The show's tagline is more honest, but still rubbishes the rest of the genre: "Reality TV just got real." Well, at least someone has. Preview video after the jump.

[WSJ]

Anderson Cooper Tired Of Bear Jokes [Innuendo]

Barack Obama Turns Murderous Hellscape Into Glitzy Media Party [Celebrity-industrial Complex]

When Barack Hussein Obama summers in his ancestral home of Iraq in a few weeks, along with some other foreign places, the trip will, of course, turn into an elite party for his showbiz friends, all of whom are clamoring for seats on his campaign plane. Katie Couric of the CBS Evening News is arranging an on-trip interview, as is Brian Williams of NBC Nightly News and Charles Gibson of ABC World News. Meet The Press wants to talk to Obama. "Star political reporters from the major newspapers and magazines" are also coming, the Times reports for Thursday's paper. So, why all the enthusiasm? John McCain's last big tour in the war zone was relegated to the evening news remainders bin. And the network newscasts have already given Obama 114 minutes of coverage since June, to McCain's 48, according to some study. The official reason: This is Obama's first overseas trip since becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee. The real reason? Let's ask some starfucking magazine editors!

From the Times:

In the last couple of weeks Mr. Obama has graced the front of Rolling Stone for the second time this year, and the cover of Us Weekly (both of which are owned by the company of a prominent Obama supporter, Jann S. Wenner). Beth Jacobson, a spokeswoman for Wenner Media, said the issues were among the better-selling magazines of the year.

Ned Martel, the deputy editor of Men’s Vogue, said, “He’s what is called in the magazine world an ‘interest driver.’ ” The magazine put Mr. Obama on its cover in 2006 and recently dispatched the photographer Annie Leibovitz to produce another spread for a coming issue. It did a feature on Mr. McCain in 2006 as well that did not make the cover.

So, basically, Obama drives ratings, which makes sense. He's a fresh face. McCain is more familiar to the media due to his longer tenue as a senator and his 2000 presidential campaign.

What should McCain do to get more attention for himself? You have to love this suggestion, from "one news executive:"

“If McCain went to Vietnam, all three anchors would jump at the chance to go with him.” This executive requested anonymity to speak candidly.

Excellent: A Rambo trip!! Which might sound crazy at first, but all bets are off when you do a professional wrasslin' video and refer to your supporters as "McCainians."

Also, Michelle Obama will not join Barack in Iraq or anywhere else on the trip to make her customary "God Damn Whitey" speech, because she will be raising her daughters, at home, like a proper Christian.

[Times]

Merrill Deal Makes Bloomberg $4 Billion Richer [The Rich]

That would bring the total, on paper at least, to $16 billion. Not a bad day for the mayor. [Business Sheet]

Project Runway [Project Runway]

The season premiere of Bravo's fashion competition is upon us. This is an experimental liveblog. Your master of ceremonies is Mister Hippity. Comment away.

Jesse Jackson Did Use The N-Word [Breaking]

The Fox News Channel is now admitting that civil rights leader Jesse Jackson used the word "n—-er" in comments about Barack Obama in front of cameras in Fox News' Chicago bureau. Fox told AP tonight that Jackson said the Democratic presidential candidate was "talking down to black people ... telling n—--rs how to behave" (that sentence fragment having first appeared on TVNewser earlier today). A Fox News Channel insider told Gawker nearly a week ago that Jackson had used the n-word, although it's not true, as we were told at the time, that the remarks were directed at Obama. Still, there's no small amount of hypocrisy at work on Jackson's part: He once called for a ban on any use of the slur. Fox's confirmation that Jackson used it himseld comes after Fox spent yesterday issuing carefully-calibrated denials about the incident.

Fox News chief Roger Ailes said in a strongly-worded letter Tuesday that "I can categorically deny" a report that Jacskon called Obama a "half-breed n—--r." That denial now looks like a fairly Clintonian, technical parsing of the question, although it did serve to protect Jackson's reputation from the worst of the rumors.

The executive producer of the O'Reilly Factor also denied yesterday (to TV Newser) that Jackson called Obama the n-word. That's true, but the network must have started getting nervous its narrowly-scoped denials would come to look disingenuous.

Fox's Bill O'Reilly last week aired other incendiary comments Jackson made in front of the cameras about Obama, i.e. that he wanted to "cut" the Democratic candidate's "nuts off." But the O'Reilly Factor host said at that time he was witholding other, "more damaging" comments from Jackson because they weren't relevant and "we're not out to make him look bad."

Here's Bill O'Reilly telling his guests last week how high-minded and virtuous the network was for not airing Jackson's complete comments:

We said at the time that "it seems inevitable the cable news channel will have to back up O'Reilly's allegations," and, sure enough, amid mounting rumors that's what's happened.

Fox News says it will not be airing the footage or releasing a transcript, which in light of the network's past flip-flops means it could very well be out by the middle of next week.

Oh, also, Jackson apologized, again, and said this time he's even more sorry. "There really is no justification for my comments and I hope that the Obama family and the American public will forgive me." Then he probably muttered something under his breath about how everyone in Hymietown is out to get him, but there were no cameras around to catch it The End.

[AP]

Gary Busey Would Like To Bounce A Few Ideas Off You [Advertising]

Here's what you've been waiting for, if you're an eccentric millionaire looking to invest a fortune in off-the-wall, possibly crack-inspired schemes: 40 business ideas from actor Gary Busey! These come in the form of 40 different ads for some obscure business phone company (whatever). The point is, Gary Busey really appears to just be riffing all of these off the top of his head so he can leave and get a drink. Bear hair dye? Oh Gary, you are an incorrigible national treasure! Two clips of his wacky wisdom, below:

[via Adfreak]

Scientist: You Can't Get Drunk On Beer [What We Need More Of Is Science]

A Yale professor of physiology has scientifically proven that's impossible to get drunk on beer. It's true! The numbers don't lie! So drink away, citizens—at work, at home, at breakfast, anytime! Of course, there's a catch: this scientician decided this in 1955, when things were simultaneously much more uptight and also sooo much cooler.

Dr. Leon A. Greenberg, Yale professor of physiology, said beer isn’t [intoxicating] – and should be reclassified to the non-intoxicating drinks.

This brought emphatic objection from other scientists. They wanted to know if the man who is “high” or “tight” isn’t also drunk. Beer certainly makes people “high” and “tight,” they said.

That's a good question! It depends on what this "high" or "tight" man is drinking?

For people to show consistently the “abnormal behavior” which goes with intoxication, the alcohol content of their blood must be 0.15 per cent or higher.

THE AVERAGE alcohol content of American beers is 3.7 per cent by weight. In order for the alcohol blood level to be at 0.15 per cent, there would have to be two and one-half quarts of 3.7 beer in the stomach. But the capacity of the human stomach is one and one-half to two quarts.

Therefore, no one can drink enough beer at one time to get intoxicated, according to theory. As for doing it by degrees: beer is destroyed or eliminated in the body at the rate of one-third of a quart an hour. So three quarts would have to be consumed in two or three hours, and this, he said, was “physiologically unnatural.”

See? It's air-tight. Back when 0.15 was considered, like, almost drunk. The good old days. Also it's totally true! We fiddled around with this handy intoxication calculator and we'd need to down 5 beers in one hour to get to like 0.11. And we'd still be legal to drive home to 1955! Thanks, science!

More Office Nostalgia [Cubicle Culture]

It's a steampunk mouse. Duh! [Boing Boing]

"Honnnnnnnnnkk!" [Open Caption]

[Those two kids from that show about kids doing kids stuff at Kid Park on Kid Island today; image of the "Gossip Girl" stars via Splash]