Just a quick note to introduce our new Fametastic writer, the wonderful Kate.

Kate has been a loyal fangirl of the site since we first bombarded her with the links back when we first started it back in the day and now she’s come on board as a writer to let me concentrate on the editing/development side of things (we’ve got some exciting developments set to happen in the very near future). She also takes us one day closer to that beautiful day when maybe, just maybe, we’ll get an office dog.

She’ll be writing on random days in May then hopefully we’ll settle down into a regular pattern in June.

Hi buddy!

We’re getting a flood of comments about the new Miley Cyrus/Vanity Fair photos and so I thought I’d write a quick blog about where I, personally, stand on the issue.

The ones last week, with the bra and the boy? There is a reason I put the word “scandal” in those inverted commas. Yeah, she’s 15, big whoop. If I recall those days correctly (and thanks to incredibly detailed diaries, I do), I certainly did my fair share of boy-draping back then. The only reason it was documented in journal writing and not on the internet was because just about no one had internet connections at home, at school or anywhere outside of very expensive internet cafes - and digital cameras? forget it.

I didn’t expect Miley to apologise for them because I thought she took exactly the right angle with the first lot of photos last year - she’s a teenager, fooling around with friends, no big deal. So I was surprised about the apologising comments she made about them - and the Vanity Fair ones. If I was her, my biggest issue with the Vanity Fair ones wouldn’t have been the suggestion of semi-nudity, it would have been because she looks really pasty and deathly in the pictures. She looks so healthy normal but those pictures? Like a creature of the night. And not in a good way.

Our story is intended to report her comments more than criticise any of the pictures. The possible exploitation angle of the Vanity Fair ones is much more of a concern for me than whether or not a little flesh is showing. She’s not flashing anything pink - she would show off more in a bikini - but if she’s been pressured into those pics, then that’s a problem and not Miley’s problem - other than to stop it happening again. WE ARE NOT CRITICISING MILEY!

I was flicking through some photos from the various Iron Man premieres this week when I came across a photo of Gwyneth Paltrow pulling the exact same smile as she did in Sliding Doors - and she looks exactly the same as she did then.

While I wouldn’t put it in my top ten films of all time, I really quite like Sliding Doors and think the Paltrow does a really good job in it - from the accent to the mannerisms to looking very pretty but still coming across as believable instead of a Hollywood insert. But that was 1998 - a decade and for her, two children ago - she shouldn’t look exactly the same now. That’s just creepy.

Is there a Sliding Doors DVD in an attic somewhere that is aging for her? Or is there something to macrobiotics and all those crazy beauty rituals after all? Quick someone, pass me the mung beans.

If Ashlee Simpson is actually pregnant, I’ll eat my hat. Well, I won’t actually eat my hat because I like wearing my hat because it’s warm and according to my boyfriend makes me look cute - but you know what I’ll mean.

I wonder if she’d be milking it quite so much if she wasn’t releasing a new album this week.

It’s frustrating because I’m 99% sure it’s all just a publicity stunt and we don’t want to fuel it but .. well, it is very gossip-worthy and that’s what we’re here for.

It’s also annoying though that Pete Wentz blames the media for a “witch hunt” when it’s Ashlee herself fuelling the sacrificial fire.

If they do have a child though, I wonder if it’ll be born already wearing eyeliner…

The New York Daily News is reporting that Beyoncé Knowles and Jay-Z’s wedding wasn’t given the standard full front-page coverage in every tabloid magazine this week because of racism.

The article quotes a number of inside sources at the magazines who, basically, say that there are very few black stars (ie, pretty much just Halle Berry & Will Smith) who are ‘mainstream’ enough to make covers and even with her decade of chart success and various high-profile film roles, Beyoncé just isn’t on that list.

Now I suspect that there is a sad but considerable degree of truth in that but I also wonder if the couple’s desire for privacy isn’t also a part of the issue. A week after the rumoured ceremony, they’ve yet to official confirm the marriage let alone release any pictures or anything. While the gossip world doesn’t usually live or die by official confirmations (or denials), the lack of anything other than a few rumours makes it difficult to get excited about, particularly a front-cover worthy level of excitement. The rumours are already out there and there were no pictures (exclusive or otherwise) so it’s hard to see it as new cover-worthy news.

Perhaps if they were on that sadly-too-short list, people would have dug out more information about it in order to flesh out that story but perhaps they designed it that way: a very small, private ceremony with few guests likely to leak the news (similarly private Gwyneth Paltrow for example isn’t likely to be blabbing to the press about it).

When comparing it to Eva Longoria’s multi-ceremony wedding to Tony Parker last year (as the Daily News does) - or to A-list weddings like Tom Cruise & Katie Holmes‘ one, it isn’t just the race of the bride & groom that’s different, it’s the whole event. Eva and Tom & Katie both went for big, lavish events, in castles in Europe with hundreds of (often celebrity) guests being flown in specifically for the event. Eva & Tony signed a rumoured $1million deal with OK magazine so they were guaranteed the cover-shot on at least one magazine - but just got a small side bar picture in People. Tom & Katie issued an official photo straight after the ceremony (the one where Katie appears to be bending down so not to tower over Tom) and it were used absolutely everywhere - but various magazines (including both People and Hello) used new “exclusive pictures” for their cover stories because the standard one was old hat by then. A magazine running the standard pic would have seemed behind the times. So with no pictures (exclusive or otherwise) and no new factoids about the event to print, I don’t find it *that* surprising that Beyoncé Knowles and Jay-Z’s union wasn’t covered more thoroughly.

I’ve just posted a review of the new Foals’ album ‘Antidotes’ by our new writer, Nathan.

He knows considerably more about music than we do so hopefully will be more interesting to read than my normal “it’s got a good beat *clicks fingers out of time*” contributions.

I do agree that Foals’ album is great though, good beat and everything *clicks fingers all over the place*.

We’re hoping to feature more reviews of UK music, TV and films in the future - if you’ve got anything you’d like us to have a look at, please email newdesk@fametastic.co.uk.