The editors of People Magazine apparently thought that turning their 100 Most Beautiful issue into a Lifetime-worthy story was a good idea. Now, before you start thinking that stoning me is also a brilliant idea, please look at the title of the issue: 100 Most Beautiful. Not 100 Who Overcame Adversity. Not 100 Who Were Challenged In Life.
Do I admire Christina Applegate for her brave fight through cancer? Of course I do. But she’s not deserving of the top spot in what is supposed to be a beauty contest. Sure, a spot, but not the top one. I think anyone would agree that there are more beautiful celebrities than her (and lots of them for that matter). Fighting cancer doesn’t make you more beautiful on the outside which is what the magazine portrays their issue to be about.
So what now? I think People has lost a little bit of their reputation for accuracy. After all, how can anyone trust such editors on style and glamour when they portray Christina Applegate as being the best the celebrity world has to offer - at least superficially?
Christina deserved a cover, just not this one. Her story is inspiring and important, but I fail to see how erroneously putting her at the top of an unimportant category benefits the world. It doesn’t, it just makes it more obvious that the editors were trying to appeal to the general public with an “overcoming adversity” story. It’s a cheap ploy to sell more magazines in an era of economic depression, Swine flu, and the internet. The public should be insulted that their intelligence is being so poorly thought of.
If, and it’s a huge if, the editors were trying to stray away from superficiality, then consider this: Robert Pattinson is also featured on the list and on their cover. He happens to be a habitual drinker and smoker whose only credit to fame is a bad acting job in a movie about vampires.
Photo Credit: People