The Scoop:  Jeff Archuleta, father of 'Idol' runner-up David Archuleta is in trouble again with American Idol producers.  When the show was still in production, he was banned from the backstage area due to alleged "stage-daddery".  This time, he planned a solo act benefit concert starring David Archuleta without consulting the 'Idol' producers. When the 'Idol' producers caught wind, they shut it down for fear that it may impede on sales of the upcoming 'Idol's Live' tour.

Colleen says:  Wow.  Aren't there contracts about this kind of thing?  I mean, doesn't 'Idol' still kind of own David Archuleta, even though he didn't win?   At least until the tour is over? 

I think Jeff Archuleta and Joe Simpson should go out for coffee and talk about other ways to live vicariously through the careers of their successful and talented children.  I imagine that any day now Jeff will be jockeying for a reality show starring his son, and featuring... himself.  There's a show I wouldn't watch. 

Still, David, I need you boo.

The Scoop:  The New York City Opera has commissioned Charles Wuorinen to compose an Opera version of Brokeback Mountain.  The Opera will debut in 2013 and will tell the story made famous by the movie which won three Academy Awards in 2005.  The story is actually based on a short story written by Annie Proulx.

Colleen says:  I may have been the only person in the history of the world who didn't really like the movie Brokeback Mountain.  The movie garnered such a reputation because of how forward it was that it felt to me if I said I didn't like it, I would be viewed as ****phobic or something.  For the record, I would march in the Pride Parade every day if I could!  In fact, my whole life is one little Pride Parade!  I love living in a world where it is becoming more and more acceptable to be who you are - regardless of who you love.  I just didn't like the darn movie. 

I honestly would probably enjoy the Opera version of it better.  I really LOVE the story, the movie just didn't do justice to the story in my opinion.  I don't know that I'm going to book my flight to NYC just yet, but I look forward to hearing more about it in 2003 (gosh, it takes a while to write an Opera). 

The Scoop:  Christina Aguilera is responding to critics who have called her a bad mom for going out on the town with her husband instead of staying at home with her newborn son, Max. 

She tells People.com, "Once in a while, if I want to go out and have a mommy-daddy night with my husband, I am more than allowed to do that. I spend all day with my son. Everybody has an opinion and everybody sometimes wants to cause drama and be mean spirited. But it's something that comes with what you do and I learned that very early on."

Colleen says:  Christina knows the value of a good soundbite.  I believe that's the one and only reason she didn't expound on this topic for an eternity, like I would do.  Although, in this one statement, she says a lot - from time to time people do love to cause drama and be mean spirited.  She's wise to have learned that and let it roll off her back. 

That said, party on Christina!!!!  Not that I'm following her around, but it sure doesn't seem that she's out every night getting smashed and losing her panties.  It seems like she goes out in moderation - and that's important for parents!  If I were Christina (which my body, hair, and voice will tell you, I am not), I would be going out to the hip clubs too from time to time.  This is insurance that she and her husband will keep the spice in their relationship to go forth and multiply again. 

Once a month, our church hosts "Kid's Night Out,"  we drop the little man off at 4 and he plays with the other kids until 7.  It's enough time for Matt and I to go to a movie or dinner and know that Ollie is being well cared for and having fun.  We know every month that no matter what else is going on, we have that to look forward to.  It's our time together.  Parents need that.  If that makes me a bad mom - so be it.  I'm not too worried. 

And furthermore, I am tired of the term 'bad mom'.  I don't want to hear it from people talking about other moms, and I really don't want to hear it from moms talking about themselves.  We all worry about whether we're doing it right, it's an important job, that's natural.  Can we just reserve the term for people who really are bad parents - the ones who neglect or beat their children (or worse), and stop using it for moms who are doing their best and occasionally trip up like we all do?

The Scoop:  Season One "Survivor" winner Rich Hatch has appealed a tax evasion conviction to the US Supreme Court.  He was charged 2 years ago having failed to pay taxes on the $1 million award from the reality show and was sentenced to 4 years in prison. 

Hatch's lawyers says that Hatch confronted producers of the show about cheating and they promised they would pay the taxes on his winnings if he kept quiet.  Of course, CBS denies these allegations.

This is not Hatch's first experience with tax evasion conviction.  He was also convicted for failing to pay taxes on his earnings from a radio show he hosted.

Colleen says:  I'm trying to remember, in Susan's (other 'Survivor' contestant) speech, was Richard Hatch the snake or the mouse?  I'm going to guess he was the snake, because this is very snake-like. 

Pay your flippin' taxes!  He won a life changing amount of money, it would still be life changing after taxes.  If there's one trait that I find completely disgusting, it's greed.  I really wish he wouldn't have won. 

Thank you for allowing me the rant.  I feel much better now. 

The Scoop:  From the AP:

The birth of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's twins is turning into the type of mystery that might make a good movie one day.

The executive producer for "Entertainment Tonight" said Monday that she wanted to "see how this story plays out" before retracting a report that the twins had been born, despite a denial from Pitt's manager and a claim that someone might be posing as Jolie's personal assistant to fool reporters.

The TV show reported Friday that twin girls had been born, identifying its source as a person in the delivery room, and quoted another Web site giving the babies' alleged names.

Rival news organizations quickly shot the story down. The Associated Press, which had picked up the "Entertainment Tonight" report after talking to executives at the show about their source, later quoted Pitt's manager saying the "ET" story was not true.

In the world of celebrity journalism, it may be the biggest story of the year.

"This is an absolutely huge, huge story for us," said Sarah Ivens, editor in chief of OK! magazine. "Essentially you have two of the most beautiful, famous people in the world. We've all seen they've had one baby, Shiloh, and it is the coolest, most adorable baby on the planet. And this time they're having two? It can't get any better."

It was "pandemonium" at the offices of Us Weekly when the "Entertainment Tonight" report was posted, said Dina Sansing, the magazine's entertainment director.

People magazine was first to report that the story was not true. Us Weekly checked its own sources and concluded the same, Sansing said.

On Monday, Jolie's attorneys advised news organizations that someone was posing as Holly Goline, Jolie's personal assistant, and had sent out false information about the movie star. The source for the "Entertainment Tonight" report was an e-mail supposedly from Goline, said an executive at the show who did not want to be identified for competitive reasons.

Was "Entertainment Tonight" punk'd? Perhaps not, the executive said.

The show initiated its own contact with Goline after hearing rumors the babies had been born in France, said the executive. The person who made the contact was an "ET" producer who had worked with Goline while at CNN and kept Goline's e-mail address, the executive said. The executive forwarded an e-mail exchange that appeared to support this version of events.

In the e-mails, Goline _ or the impostor _ said she was there for the deliveries and everyone was doing well. Pressed by "ET" for more information, the person said she could say no more.

"Entertainment Tonight" had removed its story from its Web site after the questions were raised. No mention was made of the story on Monday's show.

"Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are friends of `Entertainment Tonight.' We have spent years cultivating that friendship, working with them side by side on many of their projects," Linda Bell Blue, executive producer for "Entertainment Tonight" and its sister broadcast, "The Insider," said in a statement Monday. "We wish them and their children well. We are waiting to see how this story plays out."

Millions of dollars could be at stake. After Shiloh was born, Pitt and Jolie were at the forefront of a growing movement by celebrities to auction off exclusive rights to first public pictures of their babies (Pitt and Jolie donated the money to charity). Sometimes exclusive details on the birth come with these rights.

Ivens said OK! would be interested in exclusive pictures of the babies, but would not discuss whether there were any negotiations to obtain them.

Jolie has said the babies are due in August. Ivens said OK! grew more comfortable over the weekend that the "Entertainment Tonight" story was wrong because of other clues. There were no reports of flowers being delivered to hospitals, or grandparents flying in, she said, and Pitt was seen attending a sporting event over the weekend _ an unlikely spot for a new father of premature twins.

(Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Colleen Says:  Seriously?  Entertainment Tonight, I go to you with all my Entertainment information needs, and now I can't even trust you?  Who can I trust?  I'd like to say that I'm going to boycott ET, but we all know that my not watching is A. not going to do anything to their ratings, and B. Harder than giving up chocolate (seriously).  So, I'm going to keep watching.  I guess I just want to "see how the story plays out" too.

Just for fun, let's pretend that ET is right, they had their twins, and nobody believes them.  Let's pretend that in one week the Jolie-Pitt twins turn up on the cover of OK! Magazine.  The huge "I told you so" from ET might be kind of funny. 

In the grand scheme this is such a silly little story.  Ultimately, who really cares if the Jolie-Pitt twins have been born or not (besides Angelina and Brad)?  I actually don't care either, but this is why the Hollywood gossip fascinates me so... I am fascinated by the fascination.  I am fascinated by the power that the fascination has over people to seemingly make up stories about celebrities.  It reminds me of the politics of 7th grade (which was the worst of the middle school years, in my opinion - we were dangerous with eachother at that age). 

The idea that somehow our lives would be different if we knew that those children had been born.  The day to day really wouldn't change, we'd just have something to talk about in line at the bank or at the salon.  Celebrity talk is safe and not polarizing.  It's good to be informed so that you don't get into a potentially hostile political debate with your wait staff at a family dinner.  Celebrity talk is like the weather - your opinion of it doesn't matter too much.  It just is what it is. 

In this case though... what IS it?  Were they born or not?  I guess we'll know soon, but until then, I'll be talking about this story with the barista at the coffee shop, the LPN at the Drs. office, and the other ladies on the circuit at Curves.