(OK!)

We have to give OK! magazine some credit.

The tabloid could have been content to publish grossly wrong rumors about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt OR Jennifer Aniston and Justin Theroux, but OK! ambitiously decided to put both couples in one gloriously inaccurate cover story titled, “Angie Sabotages Jen’s Wedding.”

According to the magazine, which characterizes Jolie and Aniston as having “Hollywood’s bitterest celebrity rivalry,” the two actresses are now in a “race to the altar!”

“With Jen having found true love at last with Justin Theroux – and, friends say, planning to wed by year’s end – Angelina has vowed to upstage her by marrying Brad first,” reports OK!

Jolie has supposedly already “picked out a dress,” claim so-called “sources,” and the tabloid alleges she’s “determined to overshadow [Aniston] by throwing the more dazzling nuptials.”

“They just can’t seem to let go of their grudges,” says one of these OK! “sources.” “They’ve taken a lot of jabs at one another over the years, but Angelina seems to be the one really obsessed with proving her dominance.”

And so, alleges OK!, the two superstars – neither of whom is engaged, by the way – are trapped in escalating “wedding wars.”

The magazine slathers this nonsense with fabricated details about the upcoming events, provided by various unnamed “sources” close to Aniston and Jolie.

According to OK!, the Jolie-Pitt wedding might be in New Orleans, “but it could change to France,” and there will be “hundreds of roses in all colors” and a dinner of “steak au poivre.”

Aniston, meanwhile, may exchange vows “atop her new penthouse” in Greenwich Village – or “Cabo San Lucas, Mexico.” There will be “10,000 or more” orchids and a main course of “sea bass or swordfish,” according to a “source.”

Lovely!

There’s just one nagging little problem.

Neither couple is engaged, and certainly aren’t planning any lavish weddings.

We understand that the only thing tabloids like more than weddings is bad blood, which is why OK! decided to create this entire “race to the altar” scenario, but there’s absolutely zero truth to any of it.

Insiders assure Gossip Cop that nothing has changed since the last time OK! tried to pull a similar stunt.

The two couples remain happy but not engaged, and the magazine remains happily oblivious to reality.

Check out PHOTOS of Jen & Justin out and about in NYC!

See PICS of Angelina in London!

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter!

Like us on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

Lara Marsden is identified as the brunette “mystery woman” OK! magazine has been unsuccessfully linking to Brad Pitt for months, even though there’s never been any mystery about her role in his life.

She’s an assistant on the production of World War Z, which Pitt has been filming at various locations from Malta to London to Glasgow.

That’s it.

But OK! is deeply, deeply invested in the notion that Marsden has “caused so much turmoil in the world of two of Hollywood’s biggest sex symbols,” and can’t figure out “why Angelina Jolie is tolerating” her proximity to Pitt.

Here’s a hint: Angelina Jolie understands how movies work, and OK! magazine doesn’t.

The tabloid combs Marsden’s MySpace page for evidence that she’s “sexually provocative,” trying to portray her as a seductive vixen who poses a huge threat to Pitt and Jolie’s relationship.

But like a dog chasing its own tail, OK! winds up looking silly and desperate.

Brad Pitt is making a movie, and the movie has lots of staff. Some of those personnel are frequently photographed near him because they’re working together all day in front of hundreds of other people.

There’s nothing scandalous about any of this, and the only mystery is how OK! manages to remain so in the dark.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter!

Like us on Facebook!

(OK! magazine)

Jennifer Lopez just split up with Marc Anthony.

Many years ago, she dated Ben Affleck.

Therefore, OK! magazine presents…

“The Plan To Get Ben & J. Lo Back Together!”

Oh boy.

According to the tab, “In the wake of [the Lopez-Anthony] split – and amid rumors of marital strife between Ben and his wife, Jennifer Garner – some J. Lo pals are wondering: Is the stage set for Bennifer, take two?”

Why might the “stage” be “set”?

“They’re talking,” declares OK!, which cites a so-called “Lopez colleague” as confirming, “They’ve spoken more than once.”

Uh-huh.

Meanwhile, the core of the magazine’s cover story appears to be that Lopez’s mom, Guadalupe, really likes Affleck.

“They were like best friends when Ben was engaged to J. Lo,” explains a so-called “insider.” “He and Guadalupe were drinking and gambling buddies.”

Hold on.

Let’s get this straight.

Affleck, who’s been happily married to Jennifer Garner for 6 years and has two children with her, is supposedly on the verge of getting back together with Lopez, whom he hasn’t dated since 2004, because he… likes to go gambling with her mom?

This is just ridiculous.

As soon as her marriage broke up, the rumor mill started picking through Lopez’s former beaus and throwing superstar names out there just for attention.

But just as there’s nothing going on between Lopez and Diddy, there’s no romantic reunion with Affleck.

“None of it is true,” a source close to Affleck assures Gossip Cop, while a Lopez rep dismisses the OK! cover as “inaccurate.”

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter!

Like us on Facebook!

(GettyImages)

(GettyImages.com)

Sometimes it seems as though tabloids think their job is to make the news.

This week, OK! lamely attempts to create the impression that Brad Pitt is “hurting” Jennifer Aniston, even though there’s absolutely no reporting to support it.

Aniston, as the magazine says, “glowed” and smiled broadly at a recent “Inside the Actors Studio” taping, happy in her new relationship with Justin Theroux. Despite her beloved dog Norman’s recent passing, “life seems good” for Aniston, adds OK!

Pitt and Angelina Jolie, meanwhile, enjoyed time together in Malta, where he’s filming World War Z. According to a source for the tabloid, the couple giggled by the pool all day and “seemed head over heels” as they ate an alfresco dinner.

That’s what’s going on.

Aniston and Theroux are happy. Pitt and Jolie are happy.

But that’s no good for OK!, which needs conflict.

So the story, which is almost entirely about how great everyone feels, is titled, “Brad’s Still Hurting Jen.”

Huh?

How is he hurting her?

Well, apparently Pitt and Jolie ate at the same Maltese restaurant where Pitt and Aniston dined back in 2003.

OK! sees this as an indication that Pitt is somehow flaunting his relationship in a way that could “spoil” Aniston’s nice life. The magazine also wonders if Pitt and Jolie only talk about their lives and children “to push Jen’s buttons?”

These three just can’t win with the tabs.

As sources close to Brangelina and Aniston tell Gossip Cop, the only whiff of tension comes from OK! itself.

If the stars were as miserable as the magazines claim, they wouldn’t need to invent and reinvent their alleged pain, week after week.

Check out PHOTOS of Angelina taking the kids bowling in Malta!

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter!

Like us on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

On the heels of rumors that they’re splitting comes a major tabloid story claiming Robert Pattinson will soon give Kristen Stewart a ring.

OK! magazine reports that Pattinson “has picked out the perfect gift” for Stewart – a $17,000 vintage diamond “promise ring.” According to an “insider,” the actor “found it through a dealer who specializes in estate jewelry, and he knew it was just perfect for Kristen!”

Supposedly, the token will function as a kind of pre-engagement ring, says the OK! source, because while Stewart “loves him deeply, she’s not prepared to be Mrs. P. just yet.”

Pattinson is said to have purchased the “promise ring” because he’s “taking baby steps” toward marriage.

Fascinating.

Now seems like an appropriate time to mention, by the way, that OK!‘s track record with stories about Stewart and Pattinson has been, uh… spotty.

Apparently, when the gang at OK! gave the Wheel of Robsten a spin this week, it passed “breakup” and “pregnant” before landing on “promise ring.”

The shiny bauble has certain gullible outlets like HollywoodLife asking, “Could a wedding be next?”

Gossip Cop will instead ask, “Where does OK! come up with this stuff?”

There’s no “promise ring,” just as there was no baby, no wedding plans, no breakup, no alien abduction, etc.

Pattinson and Stewart are together. Not in a giddy elementary school “promise ring” way, and not in an old, married couple way.

They’re just together.

Maybe it’s not enough for the tabloids, but it seems to be enough for the couple.

Check out new PHOTOS of Robert in “Water for Elephants”!

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter!

Like us on Facebook!

WIN MOVIE TICKETS FOR A YEAR from FANDANGO and GOSSIP COP!

(OK! magazine)

“Yes, They’re Together!” declares the cover of OK! magazine, referring to Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds.

No, they’re not.

Yes, they’re hanging out together, but The Proposal the tabloid makes for Bullock and Reynolds being a romantic pair is less than convincing.

As everyone already knows, the friends celebrated New Year’s Eve at Bess Bistro in Austin, Texas, where they partied with a group.

Essentially, that’s all there is to the entire OK! story.

There’s filler about Reynolds’ split from Scarlett Johansson and Bullock’s break with Jesse James; discussion about the pals’ on-camera chemistry; a mention of another movie they might make; and even a detailed description of their New Year’s Eve party’s menu.

What’s missing?

Any actual evidence that Bullock and Reynolds are dating, as the OK! cover implies about their “intimate” New Year’s Eve.

An “eyewitness” for the mag reports, “By the way Sandra was glued to Ryan’s every word, they sure seemed to be taken with each other.”

Bullock was “laughing and having fun” all night, adds the tab’s source.

So there you have it: Sandra Bullock had a good time at a party and was attentive when Ryan Reynolds spoke.

Ring the wedding bells!

Again, Bullock and Reynolds could wind up “together,” but as a rep for the actress tells Gossip Cop, she and her co-star welcomed 2011 “as nothing more than friends.”

For OK!, it’s a new year… but old rumors.

Check out PHOTOS of Sandra and baby Louis visiting the Big Apple!

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

(okmagazine.com)

“Christina Aguilera Pregnant? AMA Performance Fuels Baby Bump Buzz,” reads a headline on OK! magazine’s website.

The tab’s blog goes on to write that the “revealing black body suit” that Aguilera wore last night at the American Music Awards has “been fueling pregnancy buzz as the crooner appeared to gained some weight since her tile (sic) role in Burlesque.”

OK! even asked its readers, “Do you think [her son] Max will have a young sibling soon?”

First of all, it’s always amusing when a supposed news outlet questions its readers, believing they have more insight into celebrities than they do.

Anyway, let’s cut to the chase – Aguilera is NOT pregnant.

A source close to the singer tells Gossip Cop, “She is going through a hard time, getting divorced, opening a film and caring for her son and hasn’t had time to work out,” which is why she’s gained a little weight.

Perhaps places like OK! should take a pregnant pause before publishing stories like the one about Aguilera possibly expecting.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

(OK! magazine)

Last October, OK! magazine insisted that Jennifer Aniston had “won John Mayer‘s heart” with a deceptive cover story about their “sexy nights” and the “baby plan” Aniston had with her former boyfriend.

It was complete drivel.

Now, eleven months (and zero babies) later, OK! is again trying to dupe readers into thinking Aniston and Mayer have reunited as a couple.

“John & Jen Back Together,” declares the headline of an article inside the tab, which claims that after “more than a year and a half apart” (wait, what happened to those so-called “sexy nights” last fall?), Aniston and Mayer “are giving their love another try.”

The former couple allegedly talked for weeks and finally met up for two evenings this month at The Ritz-Carlton in Atlanta, where Mayer’s tour had stopped and Aniston’s movie Wanderlust was filming.

“She’s still hopelessly in love with him,” her “pal” tells the tabloid, which claims “the feeling seems to be mutual.” According to the magazine, Mayer has supposedly “convinced Jen that he’s changed” from his sometimes immature romantic past.

If only OK! would do some growing up, too.

Aniston and Mayer are still not back together.

They have no plans to be a couple again.

While the two “remain friends,” talk of renewed romance is “not true,” a rep for Mayer tells Gossip Cop.

It wasn’t true last October. It still isn’t true now.

We look forward to OK! trying the same old trick sometime in fall 2011.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(OK! Magazine)

Earlier this week, Gossip Cop poked fun at the tabloids for claiming Britney Spears was planning a wedding this year, which by our count was her 63rd wedding in 2010 alone.

Now OK! Magazine takes it one step further, announcing TWO – yes, two – Spears weddings.

According to the tab, the singer is going to have a “double wedding” with her sister, Jamie Lynn.

Yes, you read that right.

The mag claims it was the elder Spears’ idea to “marry their boyfriends, Jason Trawick and Casey Aldridge, in a spectacular double wedding!”

What began as a half-joke, says the mag, soon turned into actual wedding plans that include “their kids [as] ring bearers and the flower girl,” the sisters walking each other down the aisle, and “fantasy guests” such as President Barack Obama, Oprah and Lady Gaga.

Why not Abe Lincoln while they’re at it?

Anyway, a so-called “source” says Trawick particularly liked the joint-nuptial ideas.

“Jason said it would be bigger than a royal wedding,” states the source, adding, “Britney’s eyes lit up… A Spears-girls double wedding would be a huge attention-getter.”

And that’s probably what OK! hoped when it ran with this completely fabricated “double wedding” story.

But back on planet Earth, a source close to Britney tells Gossip Cop “there is no truth” to the tabloid’s wedding claims. And a Jamie Lynn pal also says it’s made up.

The only congratulations to be extended here is to OK! for being wrong twice in a single story.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(Harper's Bazaar)

About six weeks ago, Gossip Cop (once again) corrected OK! magazine, which inaccurately claimed Jennifer Aniston gave a “startling frank interview for a fall issue of a monthly U.S.-based women’s magazine” about how “she will do everything in her power to have a baby ‘as soon as possible.’”

At the time, we correctly reported she “didn’t speak to a magazine about wanting to have a baby,” but rather was going to “pay tribute to an icon” with a photo shoot.

That icon is Barbra Streisand, and Aniston’s transformation into the Hollywood legend – from her roles in Funny Girl to What’s Up, Doc? – is now in the pages of Harper’s Bazaar.

Aniston also gives the glossy an interview in which she recalls meeting Streisand for the first time.

“I’ve loved her since I was a kid, and all of a sudden there she is, and she’s just like someone you’ve always known,” says Aniston. “You know when you meet people you idolize and then you walk away from the conversation thinking, ‘Well, that was a disappointment; they were kinder and more fabulous in my mind?’ Well, she was wonderful, and you could talk to her about anything.”

Aniston also explains why she feels such a kinship to  Streisand. “I had a long conversation with Barbra about directing because I directed a short a couple years ago, and if I don’t do it again soon, I’m going to burst out of my skin. And we also love interior design. Also, we are people who have been put in the spotlight, for better or for worse, and you just keep riding, and you keep overcoming, and you just stay true to what you love to do.”

“Barbra inspires me because there isn’t anything she hasn’t done that she wanted to do,” adds Aniston.

How well do you think of Aniston channels Streisand?

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(GettyImages.com)

Here we go again.

“The ink is barely dry on their divorce papers, but Sandra Bullock is already working on letting Jesse James back into her life,” a “source” tells OK! magazine.

No, she’s not.

Adds the tabloid, Bullock and James still talk “up to 20 times a day!”

This is total nonsense, and OK! should know better.

Actually… maybe they don’t.

“They are planning an August vacation together,” the magazine’s “source” says of Bullock and James, announcing, “All signs point to them reuniting.”

In reality, zero signs point to a reunion.

And conveniently, when the two aren’t spotted on vacation together next month, OK! will insist it was a “secret” reunion. The tabloid expects readers to buy a 100% bogus claim on the reasoning that anything can happen… if we don’t see it.

Bullock’s close friend tells Gossip Cop the reconciliation rumor is “not true.”

We look forward to OK! “forgetting” to update this story with actual facts and details in the coming weeks.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(OK! magazine)

It’s almost as though OK! magazine is trying to break an unofficial record for misleading stories about Jennifer Aniston starting a family.

Last September, the tab claimed an “exclusive” and declared Aniston was pregnant. She wasn’t.

By April, she’d supposedly decided to have a baby with Gerard Butler. Also not true.

In June, OK! “revealed” that she’d be announcing baby news in an upcoming interview. Nope.

Then the magazine insisted the actress had devised a “baby strategy.” Shockingly, it was wrong.

“Jen’s A Mom!” OK! blares on its current cover in another so-called “exclusive.”

Of course, the accompanying article is anything but exclusive or revealing.

It mostly discusses Aniston’s emerging romance with Chris Gartin, who happens to have two children from a previous marriage.

“She’s trying to be nice and win them over,” says a “source close to the situation.” “She says it’s like a dream come true,” reports a different “source,” who explains, “She has been wanting a family for so long, not to mention a loving relationship, and now she has both, practically overnight.”

Of course, no one wants Aniston to have a family as badly as OK!, which has been spreading varying rumors about her impending motherhood for months. And while her comfort with Gartin’s daughter Sydney and son Flynn is nice, Aniston’s evolving relationship with their dad is the article’s actual focus.

Look for more stories of the actress “playing mom,” as OK! continues to “play reporter,” giving Aniston children by any means necessary to fit their endless campaign.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(GettyImages.com)

“Demi & Ashton: Heading For A Split?” begins a not-so-OK article from OK! magazine.

According to the tab, Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore, who have been married since 2005, “are on the rocks.”

Among the supposed signs they’re headed for a split is that Moore, now filming Margin Call, is focused on her career. “She’s prioritizing [the movie] over being with Ashton,” says an unnamed source.

Really?

How is Moore being busy with a film an example of them possibly splitting up?

And anyone who reads their tweets, notably their recent ones about a “master cleanse” together, knows they’re in a solid relationship.

When Gossip Cop asked Moore’s rep for a comment about the OK! piece, we were told the story was “complete BS.”

Yet another example of bullsplit!

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(OKmagazine.com)

Remember OK! magazine’s bizarre, completely baseless cover story this week claiming Jessica Simpson was about to become a mom? Well, the outlet is doubling down on its laughable “reporting.”

Today it suggests that an Italian jaunt with new boyfriend Eric Johnson offers new evidence Simpson might be expecting. Photographers caught the couple strolling in Capri, and Simpson’s “loose-fitting and roomy” outfit is “causing tongues to wag.”

This time, OK! can’t even muster the strength to comment specifically on Simpson’s appearance, instead speculating that her flowing caftan is “perhaps perfect for hiding a baby bump.”

To recap: in the span of two days, OK! has gone from announcing on its cover that Jessica Simpson’s baby is “confirmed” to observing lamely that she wore a loose dress.

It is true that pregnant women favor loose clothing.

It’s also true that stores will sell it to women who aren’t pregnant.

A rep for Simpson calls pregnancy talk “absurd.” Gossip Cop, meanwhile, will sadly leave our flowing gowns in the closet for the rest of the summer, for fear of “causing tongues to wag.”

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(OK! magazine)

OK! has gone baby crazy.

The same publication that once claimed Tom Cruise was set to pay Katie Holmes $75 million for a second child and (wrongly) insisted… and insisted … and insisted that Jennifer Aniston was set to become a mom is back with more baby blather.

According to OK!‘s cover, a baby for Jessica Simpson has been “confirmed.” “Finally, A Baby For Jess” screams both the cover and the story’s headline.

So what makes the tabloid’s crack team of obstetricians — consistently wrong in the past — convinced that Simpson is expecting?

The actress showed off a “fuller-figured look” at a “July 4″ Greenbrier Casino Club gala, observes the magazine, which can’t even get the event’s date right (it was July 2).

OK! cites a doctor (who hasn’t treated Simpson) as saying that her tummy and facial features are typical of a woman “in her 10th to 12th week of pregnancy.”

Just in case that airtight argument falls through, OK! also points out that Simpson has a new boyfriend, Eric Johnson, whom a “source” calls “husband and father material.”

Plus, Ashlee Simpson-Wentz told Redbook last October that her big sister wants a baby.

Still unconvinced?

She’s working out and dieting regularly (which, as everyone knows, never happens unless the goal is pregnancy) and has “thrown herself into expanding her booming fashion empire” (which, as everyone knows, is what women do during the first trimester).

OK! explains that Simpson is doing more design work because it allows her to stay home.

Apparently, it never occurs to the magazine that she just likes designing.

Of course, it also never occurs to OK! that someone might actually check to see whether Simpson is expecting a baby.

Gossip Cop did — and she’s not. A rep for Simpson tells us the story is “absurd and not true at all.”

The only thing OK!‘s cover “confirmed” is the tab’s laughable track record.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(GettyImages.com)

Sometimes, reading OK! magazine is like hearing a vinyl record skip… over and over again.

Last fall, the tab told readers Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart were engaged.

They weren’t.

Then it published a cover showing the pair over the words “Wedding Of The Year” and tried to pass it off as a bombshell “Twilight Exclusive!” But the article was really about the eventual on-screen nuptials of their characters, Bella Swan and Edward Cullen, which OK! blurred by claiming Pattinson and Stewart’s real-life relationship mirrored the one Stephenie Meyer wrote.

It was an exquisitely manipulative bait-and-switch.

Since OK! couldn’t force Pattinson and Stewart to marry by comparing their lives to fictional characters, the mag later tried to move things along by getting Stewart pregnant.

Wrong again.

So when the tabloid claims this week to have the couple’s “Wedding Details Revealed,” it’s all too familiar… and all too lame.

According to OK!, Pattinson and Stewart “will spend a lot of time stressing about what could be the next big event in their lives: their wedding!”

“Neither Rob nor Kristen is big on traditions or propriety,” an “insider” tells the mag, “so a ceremony would really be for everyone else.” The same OK! source adds, “Kristen’s a total tomboy. Her worst nightmare is having to pick out a big frilly white dress and bridesmaids’ dresses.”

Fortunately for Stewart, she won’t need to worry about big frilly dresses anytime soon – because she and Pattinson are not engaged.

The couple are also likely “to dismiss wedding frills like champagne and flowers.”

Gossip Cop can assure OK! that Pattinson and Stewart plan to dismiss the “wedding” part of the wedding, too.

There is no engagement. There are no “wedding details.”

Just OK! taking another honeymoon from actual reporting.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(OK! magazine)

“Yes! I Am Having A Baby,” screams the Jennifer Aniston cover of OK! magazine, which promises “A sneak peek at the interview everybody will be talking about.”

According to OK!, “Jen is finally telling the world that she’s taking the plunge into real-life motherhood,” and she revealed this scoop in a “startling frank interview for a fall issue of a monthly U.S.-based women’s magazine.”

Like the unnamed U.S.-based magazine, OK! quotes an unnamed source who claims, “Jennifer says in the interview that she will do everything in her power to have a baby ‘as soon as possible,’ and she says she is ready for that now.”

The so-called “source” continues, “This is really her public announcement that she is emotionally ready for children. She doesn’t get into specifics beyond saying how much she wants to be a mother – and that she’s actually exploring how she can do that.”

Although the tab says Aniston might adopt, it also has an alleged “insider” saying, “Privately, Jennifer maintains she would prefer to have a baby with the man of her dreams,” and lists as possible candidates “her latest Mr. Right” Jason Sudeikis and her “Mr. Yesterday” Gerard Butler.

Enough already!

Aniston NEVER dated Butler. And she is NOT dating Sudeikis.

More importantly, Aniston didn’t speak to a magazine about wanting to have a baby.

In fact, her rep tells Gossip Cop, “She did not give an interview to any magazine… this is just more BS from OK!“

Aniston, however, did pose for photos for the September issue of a magazine, but the accompanying quotes – which have yet to be given – will pay tribute to an icon.

Interestingly, this isn’t the first or second time OK! has been wrong about Aniston and babies.

The “Friends” star isn’t planning to have a baby any more now than she was when the magazine falsely claimed she was “pregnant at 40″ on a cover last September or when it inaccurately declared on a April cover that “she’s choosing bad boy Gerard make her dream come true.”

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher have enviable bodies.

But do they shed their clothes before shedding pounds?

OK! magazine has a “source” who claims Moore and Kutcher not only do yoga together, “they also enjoy naked workouts!”

“Ashton and Demi keep their marriage hot by motivating each other to stay in shape,” explains the magazine’s mole.

That sounds reasonable.

But then OK! pumps up the story by claiming the couple hold “their own naked workout parties.”

Gossip Cop realizes that Moore and Kutcher bare a lot on Twitter, but they don’t have bare workouts.

A rep for Moore calls the story “absurd.”

Gossip Cop even wonders what a “naked workout party” looks like. Is there cake? Streamers? Musical chairs?

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(GettyImages.com)

“Vanessa Hudgens has fled her Studio City, Calif., mansion because she believes it’s haunted, a source tells OK!” reads the beginning of an article in the tabloid this week

And who exactly would that source be, Casper the Ghost?

According to that same OK! “source,” Hudgens is “too scared to live there alone.” 

So, as a result of reportedly “hearing doors slam shut and footsteps in an empty guest bedroom,” Hudgens is supposedly now living with her parents.

Actually, the only thing spookier than this story is the magazine’s reporting. 

A rep for Hudgens confirms to Gossip Cop that it’s “absolutely false.”

The reason Hudgens isn’t in her home these days is because she’s “having work done on the house,” says her rep, who noted that she’s also “not living with her folks.”

Boo, OK!

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(GettyImages.com)

Tom Cruise is revving up for Mission: Impossible 4, and OK! magazine claims to know his “secret weapon.”

It’s an “extreme tuna diet.”

Really.

According to a “source” for OK!, “Tom eats two large tuna servings a day — alternating between raw sashimi and cooked tuna steaks, which he loves to grill at home.”

Fourteen tuna servings per week? That sounds like… a lot.

Is the dish about Cruise and fish true?

“No,” a rep for the actor tells us, adding, “Where do they get this stuff?”

Gossip Cop isn’t sure. Sometimes we think the tabs print rumors just for the halibut.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Check us out on Facebook!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

(GettyImages.com)

“Kim moving to Miami!” announces OK! Magazine. The weekly claims Kim Kardashian is prepping a cross-country move from Los Angeles — and it’s not only to be near her sisters Khloe and Kourtney, who film a reality show in Florida.

According to a source supposedly “close” to Kardashian, Kim “also wants to spend more time with Cristiano [Ronaldo],” her rumored beau, who “loves Miami.”

The couple reportedly “hopes to see how living in the same city will affect their relationship.”

And the mag gets specific, claiming Kardashian has already looked “at condos in the Brickell area.”

Adds one of her so-called pals, “When she decides on something, she goes full steam ahead till she gets it.”

Wow. Sounds pretty definite.

But back in reality, where Gossip Cop lives, it’s actually not definite at all.

In fact, a source close to Kardashian tells Gossip Cop the story is “not true.”

So don’t expect to see Kim driving a U-Haul in South Beach anytime soon.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

Tom Cruise famously hopped up on Oprah‘s couch to declare his love for Katie Holmes, but according to OK! magazine, what he really wants is to get down on the dance floor.

The tab claims Cruise “caught dance fever” after he and Holmes performed “Whatever Lola Wants (Lola Gets)” at a benefit in Los Angeles on May 1. Now her hubby is allegedly driving Holmes crazy with “demands for perfection,” making her “practice several times a week.”

A “source” tells OK! that Cruise “wants them to become the new Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire.”

Ah, but there’s a hitch. The actor “believes Katie has a long way to go before she’s ready.”

Oh, and there’s a second hitch.

NONE OF THIS IS TRUE.

Cruise and Holmes did indeed dance at a benefit earlier this month. But as for Cruise catching “dance fever” and bullying his wife into an intense regimen to make them America’s most beloved dance team… it’s as ridiculous today’s other lame OK! offering.

“It is not true,” a rep for Cruise confirms to Gossip Cop.

Sadly, this dashes our dream of Mission: Impossible 4 – The Musical.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(OK!)

While we admire OK! magazine for being so romantic, this week’s “exclusive” about ”Rob’s Marriage Proposal” is just laughable.

Oh, didn’t you hear? Robert Pattinson popped the question to Kristen Stewart on the Eclipse set!

At least that’s what OK!‘s cover wants us to believe.

According to the tab, it all started after Stewart launched into a “screaming tirade” when Pattinson, busy partying in London, “missed his flight and showed up on set a day late.” An OK! source explains that Stewart was “really upset because she felt he was acting like a single guy.”

Fascinating.

Except for the fact the rumored late flight fight never happened. Gossip Cop busted it already. Pattinson arrived in Vancouver two days before he was scheduled to be on set on April 30.

As Gossip Cop reported at the time, there’s even photographic proof that Pattinson had been back in Vancouver for two days. Wouldn’t he have seen Stewart in that time?

But in OK!‘s warped reality, after their quarrel Pattinson “calmed” Stewart “with a surprise that moved her to tears.”

“Rob told Kristen he wants to spend the rest of his life with her — period,” claims a source for the mag. “He’s proposed they’ll get married one day. He knows Kristen will make a perfect wife and can’t imagine being with anyone else.”

Notice the careful wording.

On the wrong side of the facts, OK! can’t quite bring itself to say outright that Pattinson proposed marriage, even though that’s exactly what the cover and headline infer. Instead, Pattinson (supposedly) “proposed” the subject of marriage without formally asking Stewart to marry him.

How convenient!

So Pattinson and Stewart resolved a fight that never happened with a “proposal” that included no proposal (or engagement ring, or any other evidence). It’s the old “clean up one fake story with a second fake story” routine!

Gossip Cop humbly “proposes” that OK! check with us before cooking up bad dish.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

“Friends say Shia LaBeouf may pop the question to girlfriend Carey Mulligan at this month’s Cannes International Film Festival,” writes OK! magazine.

The weekly even has a “source” say, “Shia’s let it slip that he’s rehearsing what he’s going to say.”

That’s so cute that he’s practicing his lines.

And oh yeah, that story’s so not true either.

Gossip Cop reached out to a pal, who just happens to be with LaBeouf at Cannes, where “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” is being screened, and we’re told the OK! story is “totally fabricated.”

Now we can sleep.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(OK!)

Kristen Stewart is not pregnant.

Let’s get that out of the way.

But while most fans knew that already, it’s instructive to discuss OK! magazine’s latest bait-and-switch cover, the one attempting to fool people at newsstands nationwide.

In advance of tomorrow’s big Oprah interview with Eclipse stars Stewart, Robert Pattinson, and Taylor Lautner, the magazine screams, “Rob Tells Oprah: ‘Kristen’s Pregnant!’

Right beneath the headline it reads: “The inside story behind Rob’s shocking backstage revelation to Oprah.”

Let’s pause.

The logical conclusion to draw from these two statements is that Pattinson told the host, off camera, that Stewart is pregnant. In fact, the only conclusion to draw is that Pattinson made a “shocking backstage revelation,” and that it was Stewart’s pregnancy.

Now flip to the story itself, which is called, “Why Rob Told Oprah Kristen’s Pregnant!”

Still sounds like a pretty straightforward declaration of pregnancy.

At the May 6 taping, continues OK!, the host asked Robsten, “Is talk of a relationship true?” She got a “doozy of an answer from Rob: ‘Kristen’s pregnant.’”

Which is stunning… until you read further.

“Then Kristen joked that Rob’s the one who’s pregnant,” claims the mag.

Wait a minute. Isn’t that what E! Online reported happens on stage and on camera during the show? As a complete goof? After a (supposed) backstage deal so that Stewart and Pattinson wouldn’t be pressed on the relationship issue during the interview itself?

Yup, that’s exactly what OK! is lifting here to use as manipulative bait.

The joking exchange about Stewart being pregnant.

A comment OK! acknowledges is a joke before trotting out a “relationship expert” to claim Pattinson’s laugher “could mask a real desire to have kids.”

Sound like a familiar tactic? It should.

Back in September, the same magazine pretended a fictional wedding between characters Bella Swan and Edward Cullen was all it needed to tout a so-called “Twilight Wedding” exclusive on its cover.

In October, the tab acted as though it had an exclusive “home” interview with Stewart and Pattinson. Nope, just more manipulation.

And so it is the same with today’s “revelation.”

OK! took another site’s details about an on-camera joke and an alleged off-camera secret agreement, and blurred them to make it seem as though it had scored a Kristen Stewart pregnancy shocker.

It’s just plain lame.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

Although Reese Witherspoon and agent Jim Toth haven’t been dating that long, OK! magazine reports, “Reese is already window-shopping for a ring” and “eyeing diamonds.”

The weekly quotes a source saying, “Reese micromanages everything… Of course she’ll want to give some input on the ring she’ll be wearing the rest of her life.”

In fact, says the source, “She has definitely dropped a few hints.”

Here’s what Gossip Cop has learned.

Witherspoon and Toth are definitely happy together, and the relationship is headed in a good direction.

One source close to the actress tells Gossip Cop, Toth is a “really good guy” and those in her circle like him.

Another source adds they are “happily dating,” but cautions talk of a ring right now is “not true.” 

Stay tuned.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

Choosing fantasy over fact, OK! goes from Mickey Rourke scoop to duped.

The magazine’s website claims to know which actress the Iron Man 2 villain meant when he reportedly complained about an unnamed co-star recently.

After all, OK! has what it considers an impeccable source — Rourke himself!

The outlet links to a Twitter account (@Mickey__Rourke) that it assumes belongs to the actor.

Sure enough, one tweet “Mickey” wrote refers to an actress’ alleged lack of professionalism and bluntly says, “Here’s a hint: It’s Gwyneth Paltrow.”

For OK!, the case is closed. Rourke dissed Paltrow. Right?

WRONG.

Because there’s a tiny but glaring problem here.

Mickey Rourke isn’t on Twitter.

The account to which OK! links is a fraud.

And, if you actually read the other tweets, a fairly obvious fraud.

Just to double check, Gossip Cop asked a rep for the actor whether it’s him.

It is not.

Rourke “does not have a Twitter account,” we’re told, and “holds Gwyneth in the highest regard.”

“Highest regard” isn’t quite where we hold OK!‘s “reporting” here.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(HollywoodLife.com)

“Miley Are You Insane? You’re Way Too Young to Elope With Liam” writes HollywoodLife, which claims Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworth “are already seriously thinking about marriage and Miley has her heart set on a Christmas wedding, a month after her 18th birthday.”

Really?

“Once Miley gets an idea in her head, there’s no talking her out of it… she is hooked on the idea of being a young bride,” the site quotes a source telling the magazine OK!

HollywoodLife then takes the (dropped) ball from OK! and goes on to ask, “Is Miley rushing into things? Should she get to know Liam a little better before she takes this HUGE step?”

Better question: Why doesn’t HollywoodLife fact-check stories like this?

When Gossip Cop debunked this same story two weeks ago, a source close to the singer/actress laughed at the claim that Cyrus was going to marry right after her 18^th birthday.

Now the only one to laugh at is HollywoodLife… for repeating this old and inaccurate rumor.

Cyrus is not tying the knot anytime soon.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(OK! magazine)

Just when it didn’t seem like the absurd non-saga of Jennifer Aniston and Gerard Butler could take another turn, along comes OK! magazine.

“Confirmed: Finally, A Baby For Jen” announces the cover, promising to explain “Why she’s choosing bad boy Gerard to make her dream come true.” The photo shows Butler holding Aniston, and Aniston holding her belly.

That makes it pretty clear where OK! is heading. According to the tab, Aniston is either pregnant (or soon to be pregnant), courtesy of a handpicked Butler.

Unfortunately, the editors can’t seem to decide which it is.

While Aniston and Butler promoted The Bounty Hunter in Madrid on March 30, fans “started buzzing” about “the gleam in Jen’s eye, her easy, confident glow and her hand resting on her not-so-flat tummy.”

So she has a bump and a glow… that means she’s (supposedly) pregnant, right?

Not exactly. A “source” close to the actress tells OK! Aniston recently had a “heart-to-heart” with friends and relatives and “admitted this is the year she’s going to become a mom.”

Hmm. So did fans see a… practice glow and practice baby bump in Madrid?

We’re confused. Either she is or she isn’t pregnant. What, then, was “confirmed,” as the magazine’s cover advertises?

Absolutely nothing.

Just “friends” of the actress claiming, “This is the year.”

What about the declaration that Butler is going to be the father?

Another empty premise.

OK! mashes together old press junket quotes in which Aniston calls Butler “pleasant to be around,” Butler’s recent casual comment that he’d “definitely like kids some day,” and a so-called “insider” saying, “Jen adores Gerry and thinks he’d make a perfect father.”

Not a single shred of evidence Aniston and Butler have decided to be parents together.

We doubt the tab itself even believes what it’s selling, because it then adds, “Whether Gerard’s in the picture or not, certainly, Jen has options,” discussing her support of a Mexican orphanage and research she did for her artificially inseminated character in The Switch.

To recap…

OK! cover: Jennifer Aniston is definitely having a baby, and Gerard Butler will be the father.

OK! story: Aniston might be pregnant. She might not be pregnant. She might have a baby with Butler. She might adopt. She may go for artificial insemination.

The only thing “confirmed” here is that the tab doesn’t have a clue about Aniston’s future.

And oh yeah, Aniston is not pregnant with anyone’s baby.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!

(GettyImages.com)

“Miley Cyrus is so in love with co-star Liam Hemsworth that she’s planning to marry him!” announces OK! magazine.

Despite knowing her love interest from The Last Song for less than a year, Cyrus is supposedly “talking about a wedding as soon as she turns 18 [in November],” according to an OK! source. “She’s even asked her mom if she can wear her wedding dress.”

The mag then rehashes quotes from Cyrus about how much she adores Hemsworth, their on-set romance, and their post-production closeness.

Then, at the very end, the tab mentions the teenager’s parents “don’t want her to rush into marriage” and, according to the “source,” that they’ve dismissed talk of nuptials “as a joke.”

That’s precisely what Gossip Cop thought of this item.

We weren’t alone. A source close to Cyrus laughed off the story.

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter for accurate celebrity news!

Visit GossipCop.com for the latest!

Check us out on Facebook!