(5 of 7)
Apart from the change in national morals, the power of any individual gossip is limited by the proliferation of competing media outlets. Liz Smith's distribution to about 60 newspapers, her local TV appearances in New York City, and her proposed syndicated TV series, for example, fall far short of the astounding ability Walter Winchell had to reach almost 90% of the adult U.S. population during the 1930s. His six-days-a-week column appeared in almost a thousand newspapers with total daily circulation of 50 million. His Sunday-night radio broadcast reached 21 million. Parsons and her rival, Hedda Hopper, between them appeared in practically every consequential newspaper in the nation. On the other hand, while there are many more competitors on the celebrity beat than in Winchell's or Hopper's heyday, they tend to be editorial copycats. Thus an item from Liz Smith or PEOPLE magazine or Entertainment Tonight gets picked up and trumpeted by dozens or even hundreds of publications and broadcasts.
Some scholars argue that today's gossip columnists are more powerful than Winchell because audiences care more. American society has become so much more media conscious. While film and radio gave the public a sense of connection with stars, nothing compares with television for affording a false sense of intimacy. TV personalities become surrogate friends or family members, and faces glimpsed in the news or on talk shows become significant presences in the lives of many viewers. Their private lives thus seem a genuine public concern. This is reflected, according to Everette Dennis, executive director of the Gannett Center for Media Studies at Columbia University, in the news media's "increased blurring of the entertainment and information function."
One veteran film publicist terms today's gossip columnists "more professional than they used to be, more fact oriented, less careless, less reliant on hearsay." In Winchell's day, he notes, columnists ran more blind items in which no names were used, and thus were more apt to take a chance on a tip. Today's scribes are more likely to seek confirmation, though they will still rely on a hunch. Last fall Washington Times gossip writer Charlotte Hays heard that actress Kelly McGillis, who had signed for the season at the Shakespeare Theater at the Folger, was pregnant and would leave months early. "The accuracy of the rumor was obvious from the way the Folger reacted. They said, 'Oh dear, she'll have to talk to you.' " Even though McGillis didn't call back, Hays confidently went ahead, and the item was soon confirmed.
Gossip columnists admit they will haggle for a story. According to Mitchell Fink, a PEOPLE magazine columnist and Fox Entertainment News commentator, a smart flack will serve up several good items having nothing to do with his clients -- though maybe a juicy expose about someone else's -- before offering a tidbit designed to make a client look good. "How can I say no," Fink asks, "when they have sent me other blockbuster items?" Smart press agents know how to manipulate a client's image by choosing what charities and causes to support. However inconvenient the information that is circulating about oneself or one's client, it is considered a big mistake to lie outright. Some Hollywood observers were critical of Tom Cruise for going out of his way, in the weeks preceding the breakup of his marriage, to proclaim the relationship solid.