Problem: How to set yourself apart in a sea of Paris Hilton stories?

Solution: Have your Paris Hilton story be "We're making a big show about not having a Paris Hilton story."

After all, it's not as though there is any story in the first place, so it's just as well, plus the magazine becomes the subject of stories by lots of other people desperately looking for a way to set themselves apart in a sea of Paris Hilton stories.

Slate: why have you published this cynical piece, written by a purveyor of anti-journalism and masquerading as an "explanation," as though anyone could be owed an explanation for the lack of one more Paris Hilton story! Must we count you among those desperate others who either wish they'd thought of this first or cannot resist the chance to "run a Paris Hilton without running a Paris Hilton story"?

Exactly --

Slate's notoriously contrarian. This article was contrarian about Paris coverage. Now we can read contrarian comment on the contrarian article. "Why does Slate need to run contrarian comment on Paris at all?"

The real question is why Paris is interesting. We need to delve back a couple of layers of contrarian-ness.

The reason she's interesting is because we hate her. It's not about Paris, it's about us.

In fact the article makes it clear than rather than writing about the un-namable heiress, they had a photo spread of Hollywood babies. There's no presumption about being anything but puff journalism. The serious question raised is why it is that supposedly serious news outlets devoted a breath on the story.

Also, the fact that getting a scoop meant paying hard cash to the Hilton estate is newsworthy.

The article was an antidote to Christopher Hitchen's idiotic call to leave the poor child alone.

Absolutely. I'm reminded of that Simpson's Treehouse of Horrors (y'know, back when they were still funny?) wherein the big building-size advertisements and mascots came to life one stormy night. They terrorized the town until Lisa and, um, Paul Anka came up with the "Just Don't Look" song: you could vanish the giant billboard figures by turning the other way and not paying attention. Now, Paris is no Lard Lad donut boy-- would that she were-- but that's the only dang way we're ever going to get any peace.

Janice Min is the editor in chief of Us Weekly--Janice, your article resembled that of a no mind. Bush's wiretapping story is NEVER getting old. We aren't interested in Paris's DUI but we ARE interested in Bush's Nazi wiretapping. It's funny that Neil Bush who robbed the Silverado bank never went to jail, but Paris did. It's funny that nazi Prescott Bush who funded Hitler's army, never went to jail but Paris did. It's funny that you can waste ink writing about mindless smokescreen topics, such as a starlet's DUI, but you can't write about the Bush crime family in the district of criminals...You can't write the true facts that Nazi Prescott Bush was arrested and convicted for trading with the enemy, funding Hitler's army, (Grandfather of our current Nazi president and father of George H. W. Bush). You can't write that the Bushes took over John kennedy's White House chair via murder to maintain the power right to this current day 44 years later. You can't write these true facts. You should go find a new job writing airhead stories, working for the National Enquirer focusing on starlets.