There's going to be a profile of Mark Lisanti, the typing fingers behind Defamer, in tomorrow's LA Times, and whilst certain aspects of his "this-is-my-glamorous-blogger-lifestyle" testimony rang painfully true (hey, Cinematical headquarters isn't air conditioned either, kid) we're not sure how we feel about one juicy little pullquote:

"Tom Cruise [going crazy] was good for business for anybody who writes about Hollywood ... Sometimes I think I sound crazy when I say this — but it's probably one of the biggest Hollywood stories in the history of Hollywood. No story in the new media age has been that big."

Do we agree? First of all, I get uncomfortable talking about things that happened five minutes ago in the context of any kind of "history" - we're going to have to wait and see how that pans out. But I'm fixated on the last sentence - because as much as I'd like to prove him wrong, I can't come up with anything. I think the Michael Jackson trial *should* have been a bigger story, and it was for the mainstream media, but I guess it just wasn't hip enough for us "new media" folks - we just didn't accord it quite as much devotion as we did Katie n' Cruise.

But this can't be right ... can it? Let's start talking about this - is the recent Tom Cruise hoopla the biggest Hollywood story of "the new media age"?
categories Cinematical