It used to. I don’t know any longer - I let my subscription lapse when they decided to go towards a younger demographic.
I call bullshit on you. You’ve unfairly redefined “gossip” to include “who is working where, who got what budget, and what movies are expected to be hot”. In other words, any reporting on film whatsoever! This is crazy!
Gossip: To talk idly about the affairs of others.
Unless you were hoping to get Robert Rodriguez to produce your script and he can’t because he’s busy at the moment, discussion of his current project is pretty idle.
You still do that in my head though.
Buwha? I talk with my friends about Obama vs. McCain, knowing we have absolutely no chance whatsoever of influencing the outcome. Does that count as gossip?
Your bullshit redefinition of the word “gossip” encompasses all news reporting. You may as well call every trade magazine a “gossip rag”
This is one of those inane statements that tend to come back and haunt posters on this board.
If you have any sense, now is the time for you to apologize and move on.
For me, it’s the “at least I” factor. Angelina Jolie may have men slobbering at her feet, but “at least” I have a real husband, not a common-law one. Paris Hilton may have millions of dollars, but “at least” *I * haven’t had to go to jail. It’s a sad, pathetic kind of superiority I have to find to assure myself that I have something in my life that’s better than these people while I’m standing in the grocery store line.
And then I go home to my small, but nice house, and my wonderful husband and my lovely, loving doggies and am glad I didn’t buy the magazine but just put it back on the rack. “At least” I’m smart enough.
ETA: I think the expression “smart as a whip” comes from smarting = hurting, as in “That smarts!” when someone hits you with a whip.
Hey, its the dictionary definition of gossip. If you are talking idly about Obama, yeah, I suppose that’s gossip. If you are discussing their public policy stances so you can make an informed choice about voting in the next election, then it isn’t idle.
Gaffa, if you work in the industry, then EW is a trade magazine for you. For the vast majority of people who read EW, EW is a gossip magazine - the information entertains them, it isn’t useful other than as entertainment. I doubt the copy of EW at my dentists office is being used in any manner other than idle.
Not so. In those conversations, “I think celebrity gossip is incredibly stupid and anybody who can name Jennifer Aniston’s romantic partners is a pathetic loser” is a wrong opinion. Believe me, I know.
Not so. It merely removes the rudeness to a comfortably deniable distance. The celebrity-gossip industry that gives you the material about which you converse so blithely is a grotesque intrusion on the lives of real, actual people. Think about having to hire security to keep screaming photographers away from your children 24-7-365. And “it goes with the territory of being a celebrity” is merely an after-the-fact rationalization for how bad it has been allowed to become.
I’m an anal-retentive neat freak. If I see the hair draped across the magazine, I’ll remove it. I do not, and will not, crack open a gossip rag, for any reason. The whole world of celebrity obsession utterly repulses me.
I just want to give you a big 'ol cyber-hug. So glad to hear that I’m not alone. 
Weaseling around to find a definition that fits your tar-brush is unbecoming. Post a link to a dictionary that supports your definition or apologize.
Nonsense. I read Entertainment Weekly one very specific and worthy reason: I an am consumer of entertainment. I saw over 150 film in the theater last year, read a book a week, listen to music and even see the occasional play or musical. And that is exactly what the editorial content of Entertainment Weekly is about. I have a pile of them here, and can pick up any random issue and find that the majority of the non-ad content is exactly and specifically about movies, TV, books, records and plays - the content and the creators.
By your silly definition, anyone who reads books on politics who isn’t a politician is engaging in idle political gossip.
Right back atcha, freekalette.
And people wonder how evolutionary psychology’s name ends up dragged through the mud…