Most Read: Entertainment

Live Discussions

Weekly schedule, past shows

Celebritology Celebritology Chat with Us - Thursday 2pm Contact Us Facebook Twitter RSS
Posted at 03:40 PM ET, 03/19/2012

Gwyneth Paltrow takes New York Times to task over ghostwriter claim

Gwyneth Paltrow. (Pascal Le Segretain - Getty Images)
Update: A rep for the New York Times told E! News, “The article does not merit correction.”

Original post

The non-conflict of the century is upon us.

On one side, we have actress, celebrity newsletter writer and cleanse shiller Gwyneth Paltrow. On the other, the New York Times’ dining section. Here we go.

In a March 14 article titled “I Was a Cookbook Ghostwriter,” reporter Julia Moskin talks about her time working with chefs on their cookbooks and about the practice in general.

For part of the piece, Moskin talked to writer and chef Julia Turshen, who worked with Paltrow on the actress’s best-selling cookbook, “My Father’s Daughter.”

Although Moskin does not say in the piece that Turshen was Paltrow’s ghostwriter, the article’s illustration uses the cover of “My Father’s Daughter” with the caption, “Gwyneth Paltrow’s ghostwriter is Julia Turshen.”

Paltrow says this is a fallacy. She tweeted, “Love @nytimes dining section but this weeks facts need checking. No ghost writer on my cookbook, I wrote every word myself.”

(Celebrity chef Rachael Ray has also denied the article’s implication that she has used a ghostwriter.)

For the record, Turshen’s partnership with Paltrow is not in question. In the cookbook’s author’s note, Paltrow writes, “I literally could not have written this book without the tireless, artful assistance of Julia Turshen.”

Paltrow continues, “She quantified, tested, and retested every recipe, oversaw the production of the photos, helped brainstorm in a crisis, and, above all, was my intellectual and emotional support through the whole process.”

But clearly Paltrow is upset by the implication that she didn’t write the actual words in the cookbook and wants the world to know it. Instead of e-mailing the article’s author and presenting what she sees as the facts, she tweeted a call for a correction to her 811,00 followers.

So far, one has not been given for what appears to be a semantics issue. And somehow the world continues to turn.

By  |  03:40 PM ET, 03/19/2012

Categories:  Celebrities | Tags:  Gwyneth Paltrow

Read what others are saying

    © 2011 The Washington Post Company