Advertising Age reported yesterday that the first images of Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony‘s twin babies — scheduled to arrive on Saturday, if rumors are true — will most likely yield a record purchase price, as People magazine is prepared to shell out anywhere from $4 to $6 million for the photo-shoot. Although all parties involved — including reps for Jennifer and People’s Managing Editor Larry Hackett — denied that there is a deal in place, people "familiar with the negotiations" say that one has, indeed, been reached.
The specifics call for People to retain the rights for domestic use of the images and OK! magazine to assume control of all international use, Advertising Age reports. If the Lopez-Anthony twins do go on to fetch the $4 to $6 million figure quoted above, they’ll eclipse the buying-price for the first images of Shiloh Nouvel Jolie-Pitt, turning 21-months next week, which garnered a rumored $4 million. Shiloh’s parents — Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt — donated the proceeds to charity.
Why are we so interested? OK‘s Editor-in-Chief Sarah Ivens says it’s all about the positivity aspect.
There’s nothingnot to love about watching these woman blossom and their bodies changeand then having babies. It’s all just such fun, lovely, positive stuff,isn’t it? Part of the reason that the demandis so huge – and everyone is so excited about it — is because it’s such anice antidote to all the other celebrity news that’s going on at themoment
Our own Danielle Friedland agrees, but thinks that the interest is also part of good old supply and demand. She tells the Associated Press,
Celebrities always havechildren … it’s just that we’re paying so much more attention to themright now. The more that we see of them, the more wewant.
In related news, Gawker reports that a deal for the first photos of Harlow Winter Kate Madden, 5 ½-weeks, has been finalized. Nicole Richie and Joel Madden will take home $1 million courtesy of People for introducing their daughter in the magazine. And, last but not least, Christina Aguilera graces the cover of People this week with her newborn son Max Liron, 5 ½-weeks; She and husband Jordan Bratman were reportedly paid $1.5 million for the rights to the photos.
Larry refused to confirm the price, however, telling AdAge "I just don’t talk about it."
No matter the sticker price, many in the industry are wondering whether the Richie-Maddens and the Bratmans plan to donate their reported payments to charity. Following the precedent set by the Jolie-Pitts, Bridget Moynahan donated proceeds from baby John‘s first photos to two children’s charities, while Sheryl Crow sold first images of Wyatt in exchange for a large donation to the World Food Program. Nicole and Joel also started their own charity, The Richie Madden Children’s Foundation, and industry insiders are questioning whether the cash will make its way there, or end up in their own bank accounts instead.
Either way, as Getty Images’ Roxanne Motamedi tells the New York Daily News, a celebrity parent selling photos of their newborn is often the smartest and safest way to go about introducing their child to the ever-adoring public.
It’s more beneficial for celebrities to cooperate with a company likeus to do their baby pictures versus not doing it, because thenpaparazzi will chase them and will not stop until they get the pictureof that celebrity with the baby. But once the picturesare out, there is really no value of paparazzi chasing them and tryingto get the baby shot.
Everyone is curious to see. The bigger the celebrity, the more people want to know what thebaby looks like. It sells magazines.
LA publicist Howard Bragman agrees, adding,
When you hit the level ofTom and Katie and Suri, you can’t shut it down. It’s pure economics. If you put those out inthe world, those pictures, which they did, and they controlled whichimages were out there, then suddenly the monetary incentive for thepaparazzi is taken away from them.
Thanks to CBB reader Sharon.
What’s your opinion? Should celebrities sell their baby photos or wait for paparazzi to snap them out in public? Should profits go to charity, directly to the parents, or do you not care either way?