Widener Library at Harvard has Photoplay on microfilm. I have requested the reels from 1970 -71.
The bad news is they have to be shipped in from storage, so I won’t be able to look at them until they arrive - Monday at the earliest. If that picture (and any caption or other text) is in there, I’ll find it.
Or if anyone wants to beat me to the punch, you could check your local big-city or college libraries.
Veritas!
This looks promising.
umkay, maybe we are being hoaxed.
(not really, maybe we are, but this could be some random photo with no real hoax involved)
I suggested Joe Hamilton based on this picture. Notice the smile lines around the mouth and the hair part and the left ear look pretty close to MM. But the nose looks a little off, so I’m not really sure.
Shit, I was all set to get on board the Newley train but that nose is wrong. The Newley photo on the left, he has a pretty straight nose - but the MM has a more sloped/downward slanted nose.
I’ve seen it, and anyone else with access to ProQuest Historical Newspapers can see it too. If you think that I am lying about this then I would appreciate it if you would at least do me the courtesy of saying so directly.
If Carol Burnett said the man is Anthony Newley, even if she is mistaken, don’t you think it verifies that this group of people were together at some place in time for this photo. And more importantly, don’t you think she would recognize her own husband- Joe Hamilton?
I look forward to Vashbul’s discovery. By the way, Carol was asked by someone who works with her, in person I think, and not a random email by a fan.
And, Stoid, yes you may see the email since we are friends. I am surprised by the mistrust on this board. Maybe I am naive.
Don’t take it personal. Look at the very name of this board. Most people here take it quite seriously and for good reason.
I live near the University of Illinois, a librarian is doing a search for me.
Never know, it might lead somewhere.
A big thank-you to our library patrons!
Thanks, Lieu. I just hate for people to do extra work confirming it isn’t a hoax when I know it isn’t. It’s all good.
They were divorced in 1984. Maybe she doesn’t want him to get the credit 
For the life of me I don’t know why I’m engaging this person. Stubbornness, I guess. I’m a Leo, it’s my nature.
Look up ad hominem. Telling someone who’s using boldface, underline and italics to highlight (invalid) points to chill out is not ad hominem. Telling someone she has lost “all credibility” just because I suggested you dial down the Bosda-esque (and actually, Stoid-esque!) text decorations is closer to an ad hominem attack–but by a micrometer. Insulting Lamia by implying she’s lying, however… yeah, that’s ad hom. Insulting a poster who spent ten years as a professional researcher and is currently a web developer by implying that I don’t know what a paywall is? That’s close to ad hom. too.
Does anyone else think I’ve lost all my credibility here? 'Cause if so, I’ll bow out.
Ahhhh, now calling me a liar. No, that’s not an insult at all!
I’m not even gonna bother with your constantly moving the goalposts of what a motive for such a ridiculously banal hoax would be. First it was making a name but no! now it isn’t. Causing a ruckus was another option, but no! now it isn’t. The mind boggles.
Yes, no kidding. But the images and OCR from newspapers.com and newspaperarchives.com are taken from documents behind a paywall. Are you suggesting that our hoaxer works for newspapers.com and newspaperarchives.com and/or has managed to hack their websites? As well as the stuff behind the paywall from which the sites are pulling the content?
Really? Or to put it your way: REALLY?!
Goalposts, goalposts, who has the goalposts? Which way did they go, George, which way did they go? I submitted several links to videos of gala dinners to answer your second question, which I guess proves I have clairvoyance because that certainly ain’t what you asked the first time.
Frankly, here’s a better question: what the heck does your new question have to do with whether these actors/performers/award-winners were dressed up on the Tonight Show? Because whether or not the awards were announced on TV after or before a private Hollywood party, or were given out at a separate dinner, the stars would’ve been dressed up. That is the point.
Lamia already addressed this not-very-veilled accusation toward her. So now Lamia is part of this alleged hoax? For shame, Lamia! Do you realize that your perfidy has caused trauma to… why, we must be talking dozens of hapless victims!
Okay, so this person found a photo of some random 1970s stars on a random Tonight Show episode where that first seat happened to be empty, decided to perfectly Photoshop this mystery dude into the image (despite no one being able to prove any hints of actual image manipulation)? Plus the question exists: where does this guy’s image come from? The hoaxer had to find an appropriate-era guy, in a tux, looking at his fellow guests, sitting precisely in the right position to fit in that first chair, hacked into the newspaper.com and newspaperarchives.com to alter at least a dozen different newspapers, hacked into the New York Times archives… and finally, let’s not forget, invented a time machine so that s/he could go back to 2011 and post a thread on some Eastern Virginia radio forum that mentions the awards…
All for 20K pageviews.
Dayum. Frankly, if someone seriously did all that? S/he deserves all the pageviews and attention we’ve given him/her. Because this is one helluva diligent hoaxer.
cococ173, did you confirm that this was Ms. Burnett’s recollection, or your friend’s guess? That was up-in-the-air when you posted earlier, I think.
Again, I don’t want to sound like my interlocutor up there, but I hope you understand that some skepticism is in order when a new poster arrives out of the blue to announce that they know someone who knows Carol frikkin’ Burnett. You must realize that none of us (save Stoid) know you, right? I don’t even know if Stoid knows your friend. Surely it’s not that strange that some of us are hesitating a bit?
(Especially since wow, that guy looks less like Newley every time I look at him. Anthony Newley in the late '60s through the early '80s had a fuckton of hair that he enjoyed fluffing up and showing off. This guy is as prim and proper as Felix Unger.)
There’s skepticism that’s over-the-top (c.f. Sherred) and there’s normal, everyday doubt. I think we’re exhibiting the latter.
But honestly, if your friend does indeed work for Carol Burnett, that is extremely cool and I hope she’s as awesome a person in real life as she appears to be.
IF the library has them(possibly actual magazines too!) it could take up to 4 weeks for them to get sent here.:eek:
I said sure go ahead, I hope we know before then.
Choie: co and I live in Hollywood, so having a friend who knows Burnett isn’t much of a thing, the way it might be in most of the country.
The only “hoax” scenario that makes any sense is if someone decided to 'shop himself into a photo of celebs for the heck of it, and then posted it for his friends, properly labeled as the photoshop work that it was, but then somehow it got away from him, because maybe someone did a search on one of the people in the photo.
That would explain why he’s in the chair, and everyone else is on the couch or behind it, and why the photo is blurry.
I don’t actually believe this, I’m just saying that as a hoax scenario, it’s the only thing that really makes sense-- the photo was created for a personal reason, and not actually to fool anyone, or start a Facebook page, and threads on several different websites.
Exactly. It’s not that big of a deal. If anyone put a lot of effort into finding the answer and wasn’t having fun doing it then… well, I don’t know, why did you do it?
But Patrick Wayne was also in the cast of Big Jake, so he presumably would have been down in Mexico with his father during the October to December 1970 (per Wiki) shooting of that film.
Just playing devil’s advocate here: the empty chair thing isn’t a good objection. There could have been another celebrity there–hell, it could have been Johnny himself coming out front for a group photo–and the hypothetical prankster simply 'shopped a photo of his Uncle George’s face over the original, just for shits ‘n’ giggles.
That does not look like Anthony Newley. It actually looks like Francois Truffaut