In entertainment news today, Russell Brand and Katy Perry have parted in an amicable fashion, according to reports.
   Perry signed her divorce documents with her trade-mark smiley face, while Brand is not making any claim on his ex-wife’s fortune. The couple did not have a prenuptial agreement.
   Forbes had reported that between May 2010 and May 2011, Perry had made $44 million, while Brand made $7 million.
   The couple were married for 14 months.
   Meanwhile, So Solid Crew’s MC Harvey has backtracked over his claim in a Now interview that he had had a relationship with Britain’s sweetheart, Cheryl Cole.
   Cole then launched into a Twitter argument with Harvey after reading the interview.
   Since lawyers have been involved, Harvey has stated on Choice FM that the relationship was email-based but had never happened offline.
   He told DJ Max, ‘I will 100 per cent say that we had a communication relationship, but have I been out with her? No I haven’t.’
   Cole is now suing Now. A statement reads, ‘Cheryl Cole has today commenced legal proceedings in London against the publishers of Now magazine as a result of its two articles about her alleged “secret romance” with Michael Harvey.
   ‘Cheryl’s lawyers have asked to see Mr Harvey’s alleged emails which the magazine says are “proof” of the “romance” but it claims not to have them in its possession. Mr Harvey’s claims are denied by Cheryl and she looks forward to seeing both him and the magazine in Court at the very earliest opportunity.’

Never believe ‘sources close to’ in media, those well meaning folk who use their own constructs to read a situation—or those who simply invent gossip to fuel their importance. We’re not exactly falling for the news that there is an Ashley and Cheryl Cole reconciliation, even if the footballer was seen attending his ex-wife’s 28th birthday party at the Sanderson Hotel in London’s West End.
   An image of Cheryl Cole, with her new-look blonde bob, wearing a Stella McCartney dress and cutting her cake, can be seen in the report below.
   Ashley Cole, freshly flown in from New York, attended the party for four hours. Cheryl’s publicist has confirmed his attendance.
   Other guests included Will.i.am, Fergie, Tulisa Consto­stavlos, Nicola Roberts and Kimberley Walsh.
   Our view: exes showing up at parties is not a sign of reconcilation, but the British tabloids love speculation and their ‘sources’. So far, it’s only the tabloids who are providing detail from unnamed ‘guests’. The analysis of their careful wording is proving more interesting than the story itself.

David X. Prutting/Billy Farrell Agency

Lady Gaga loves to shock, and she did so again at the CFDA awards at the Alice Tully Hall, Lincoln Center in New York on Monday night. Donning a turquoise wig and enormous platform heels—which made it so hard to walk she literally needed support—Gaga accepted the Fashion Icon Award from V magazine editor-in-chief Stephen Gan.
   She had been accompanied to the awards by her parents, Joseph and Cynthia Germanotta.
   Jack McCollough and Lazaro Hernandez for Proenza Schouler took home the Womenswear Designer of the Year award, presented by Naomi Watts, wearing Calvin Klein. Michael Bastian won Menswear Designer of the Year, presented by Gerard Butler. Alexander Wang won the Accessory Designer of the Year Award, presented by Iris Apfel.
   Karolína Kurková, wearing Diane von Furstenberg, presented the three Swarovski Awards, promoting emerging talent, to Prabal Gurung (womenswear), Robert Geller (menswear) and Eddie Borgo (accessories).
   The Geoffrey Beene Lifetime Achievement Award was presented to Marc Jacobs by Sofia Coppola.
   Other award winners included Phoebe Philo of Céline (International Award, presented by Kanye West), Hal Rubenstein of InStyle (the Founder’s Award, established in memory of CFDA founder Eleanor Lambert, presented by Jessica Alba), Hilary Alexander of The Daily Telegraph (Media Award, created in honour of Eugenia Sheppard, presented by Michael Kors), and photographer Arthur Elgort (Board of Directors’ Special Tribute Award, presented by Vogue’s Grace Coddington).
   The Geoffrey Beene Design Scholarship winner Lauren Sehner, the Liz Claiborne Fashion Scholarship winner Yejun Lu, and the CFDA–Teen Vogue Scholarship, in partnership with Target, winner Amanda Gyuran were acknowledged by CFDA executive director Steven Kolb. Kolb also announced a new scholarship programme with Gilt Groupe.
   Other celebrities at the awards included Miranda Kerr, looking sexy in a black dress, while Liv Tyler appeared in Proenza Schouler, and Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour in Marc Jacobs.
   Alba wore a neon orange and purple Diane von Furstenberg, disguising her baby bump. Other celebs caught in the segment below included Marcia Cross, in a Pamella Roland jumpsuit; and Ashley and Mary-Kate Olsen in the Row and Chanel respectively.
   CNN anchor Anderson Cooper MCed the event. It was underwritten by Swarovski, for the tenth consecutive year. QVC was the official red carpet sponsor.
   CFDA president Diane von Furstenberg, Adam Kimmel, Adam Lippes, Aerin Lauder, Alejandro Ingelmo, Alexander Wang, Alexis Bittar, Aymeline Valade, Behati Prinsloo, Betsey Johnson, Brad Goreski, Chanel Iman, Chloë Sevigny, Chris Benz, Cynthia Rowley, Daphne Guinness, David Neville, Derek Lam, Donna Karan, Doutzen Kroes, Erin Fetherston, Francisco Costa, Georgina Chapman, Guinevere van Seenus, Inez van Lamsweerde, Italo Zucchelli, Jason Wu, Jeff Halmos, Jenna Lyons, Joseph Altuzarra, Kenneth Cole, Keren Craig, Lisa Mayock, Liya Kebede, L’Wren Scott, Maggie Rizer, Marcus Wainwright, Michael Bastian, Michael Kors, Nadja Swarovski, Nicole Miller, Pamela Love, Patrick Robinson, Patrik Ervell, Phillip Lim, Rachel Roy, Reed Krakoff, Richard Chai, Richard Lambertson, Sam Shipley, Sessilee Lopez, Simon Spurr, Sophie Buhai, Sophie Theallet, Stan Herman, Tory Burch, Tracy Reese, Vera Wang, Vinoodh Matadin, Yeohlee Teng, Waris Ahluwalia, Yigal Azrouel and Zac Posen were also in attendance.
   VIPs included Amber Heard, Ashley Greene, Carla Gugino, Ebon Moss-Bachrach, Estelle, Joy Bryant, Kathy Griffin, Katie Cassidy, Kelly Rowland, Kerry Washington, Leelee Sobieski, Leigh Lezark, Lucy Liu, Matt Bomer, Nate Berkus, Russell Simmons, Shenae Grimes, and Thomas Mars.

Lady Gaga, 2010’s (and 2011’s) mistress of publicity and fame, has stepped in to the editor-in-chief’s chair at Metro UK, as guest editor for a day.
   The singer wore a choker, bra top and black pants as she took the editor’s chair. She then led an editorial meeting where she discussed LGBT and equality issues, hoping to provide a fairer tone in reporting, and the Japanese earthquake. She also wrote the editorial for the paper.
   ITN provides a summary of Gaga over the past year, from the meat dress (was it that long ago now?) to her surprise concert at Cannes, with the plastic egg from the 2011 Grammy performance of ‘Born This Way’ in between.
   Born This Way, the album, débuts next week.

Mario Testino

Above Prince William and Kate Middleton’s choice of Mario Testino for the official engagement portraits led to the media dissecting everything from tradition to fashion.

There have been many stories this month not just on the Royal Wedding, but on how unimportant the Royal Wedding is. It’s almost a backlash, as surveys go out asking if people would rather attend Kate Moss’s wedding over Kate Middleton’s, or if The X Factor is more important than the Royal Wedding.
   There seem to be two underlying currents behind the types of articles. The first is anti-monarchy: the idea that this is an antiquated construct and why on earth should we care? The second is the opposite, decrying how far we have slipped from civilization if manufactured celebrities rank above the family of the head of state.
   This entry doesn’t analyse the merits of monarchy versus republicanism, other than to remark that both systems still result in some degree of institutionalization. If we simply were to take Britain versus France, both nations still create, as far as publications like ours are concerned, certain people who are hyped, people whom we would label celebrities, stories about whom are packaged for general consumption.
   The republic of the United States has economies for some celebrities larger than numerous national economies, celebrating their entertainment value. When it comes to who gets the most eyeballs in publications like ours, it’s Lady Gaga who outranks Kate Middleton in the last few days, even if the Royal Wedding was the most searched-for topic over the past fortnight.
   Gaga is an entertainment force, and she differs from some of her predecessors in her personal and conscious manipulation of her fame. There is almost an admirable subtext to songs such as ‘Born This Way’, in which Gaga tries to communicate a more unifying message of tolerance, while The Fame Monster details the darker side of a media-obsessed culture.
   Her detractors are, if one scans the headlines over the past month, relatively few. She nets headlines for whacky clothing and ‘Judas’ has received criticism despite not even having been released, though it would not be the first time she has been accused of blasphemy.
   But overall, examining her record of songs and the use of her fame for some philanthropy, Gaga seems to be more a force for good, one which sees her fans return for further news of the singer.
   In putting up news of her in these pages, we haven’t exactly aimed for much more than documenting the impact of a celebrity in our Zeitgeist, surely the task of any fashion magazine. It’s not just her clothing, but the fact that she is in vogue, and that has consequences in how we determine modern style.
   We have, however, had a more selfish motive in seeing how The X Factor develops in the US. In the greater scheme, whomever judges the American version of the show is not that important. When those videos become available to our publication, we will be tempted on a quieter news day to publish; and if Cheryl Cole happens to be a L’Oréal spokeswoman, then all the better for relevance to our core readers. Cole is part of the Zeitgeist, though not as much as Gaga; and one article in the past week was intentionally put up as an experiment to see whether there was indeed more interest in The X Factor than in the Royal Wedding, with one article for each topic going online in the same hour. As it so happened, the Royal Wedding won. (We know it’s hardly scientific and one would have to examine the sample, the headline’s quality, and the availability of rival media covering the same story. But please bear with us.)
   We might conclude that in such a publication as Lucire, of course there is interest in the Royal Wedding, especially in whom will dress Kate Middleton on April 29. It’s been a regularly discussed topic (internally, Sarah Burton is the favourite). We could say that the source of the interest is the Royal Family’s media machine, or the desire by media to show that it is loyal to the Royal Family. From a media point of view, they were savvy enough to have hired Mario Testino for the initial engagement portraits, which then prompted instant analyses by fashionistas and royal-watchers alike in ensuing days.
   But, surely, few would care if either Wills or Kate were vilified, no matter how hard either institution tries. HRH Prince William’s father’s image was not at its highest when he married the former Mrs Camilla Parker-Bowles, hence a relatively quiet media on their wedding day.
   This is not the situation of a train-wreck which must spur the Charlie Sheen coverage; media attention for which is happily decreasing. It was indeed a shame when media began covering the incomprehensible utterings of an actor over the devastation in Japan, but either good or bad news sells, and Mr In Between is something that media neither wish to mess with, or give many column inches for.
   It is a reasonably positive image of the Prince, and in a not insubstantial manner, the perceived goodwill of his mother, that might account for some of the public fascination; and the desire to share in a "good news" story. In a less media-connected age, the Prince’s parents’ support came from the belief that these two people were inherently decent, and while royal scandals are nothing new, 1981 was a time before the Wapping dispute, before wire-tapping gave us insights that monarchists would rather forget, and before mainstream media lost their ability to guarantee greater homogeneity of opinion. Even if it were not the media, the souvenir licensees alone had us far more fascinated about Charles and Diana than William and Catherine.
   Whether Britain, Sweden or Belgium should have a hereditary head of state is one matter, but we would like to think that, in most cases, people wish to follow whom they believe to be good people, and that, at least as far as our stats go, the Royal Wedding is more in the Zeitgeist than Chezza, Simon Cowell and The X Factor judging panel. In today’s world, the powers that be can only do so much, but if the public demand isn’t there, then their influence will always be limited.—Jack Yan, Publisher

When we first started offering an RSS feed for Lucire in the late 2000s, we set it up to work as we did on other sites: providing users with full feeds. In the early 2000s, when I began blogging, I understood that full feeds were preferred.
   This previous month, however, saw a record number of complaints issued by us against parties who had appropriated our content to put on their sites. A lot of the content stolen were our features, which required manual intervention. However, in some cases, they were automated and taken from our RSS.
   Since we have certain conditions we have to observe to team members and licensors, we have to protect our content. We do this in as friendly a way as possible, by notifying the owner of the site first and initially asking them to reduce the content to an excerpt.
   Unfortunately, in the majority of cases, the site publishers ignore these requests—which, I might add, are totally absent of threatening language or legalese. This leads us to enquire with their hosts. Almost all web hosts have a policy forbidding copyrighted content appearing on their servers without permission.
   We’d like to switch the RSS feeds to offer only a summary, but would like to know what regular users thought of this idea.
   I am a subscriber to the feeds myself, and on my system, with the increase in video content, I am finding that I need to come to the site anyway. The images (through the Feedburner service, at least) don’t come through in my emails. For a fashion title, images are pretty important.
   Please pop by to the site to let us know your thoughts, or contact us through our feedback form privately. We know we’re asking honest users to consider a change because of a few dishonest people.
   If you feel strongly that the status quo should be maintained, let us know, and we can review the situation if we find the piracy increases. If you don’t mind one way or the other, please also let us know. And if you’ve suggestions, they’re also welcome, though bear in mind we have our hands tied on a lot of content when it comes to Creative Commons. We’d like a fair representation of comments, and we thank you in advance.—Jack Yan, Publisher

To my loyal and hard-working team: thank you.
   This is a very public thanks to you all for getting us to a landmark: 101 articles picked up by Google News in the course of a month.
   While these numbers are tiny alongside the big sites, it’s not bad for an independent, niche publication working in several media. More so when you consider that our very first issue, in October 1997, stayed largely static till December of that year, all laid out using old-fashioned HTML.
   In 2001, we found that a fortnightly schedule was too much, in those pre-content management system days. Now we update regularly during the day.
   In fact, our latest email newsletter, which went out yesterday, was already dated by today, since two more features and countless more news articles went online after its posting.
   To our regular readers, thank you for standing by us over the last 14 years. This is a little reminder that we are giving away a 50 ml La Prairie Midnight Rain to those joining our Facebook page. All you need to do is “like” it. (Some conditions apply.)
   Let’s break some more records in the years to come!—Jack Yan, Publisher

This is a war zone; but no sign of the enemy. People crushed to death; people trapped; people missing. Friends are missing. People’s lives shattered forever.
   Christchurch’s latest earthquake just before 1 p.m. yesterday is New Zealand’s worst natural disaster.
   The mood and atmosphere around the streets and suburbs of Christchurch is one of anxiety, fear and shock.
   The first I knew about what was to come was an ascending and violent rumbling noise. A 1·8 m-high wall to wall bookcase behind my desk tumbled down on me. Books flew right across the room like paper darts. I was trapped for a time but, in between the jolts, managed to squeeze under a desk before being thrown to the other side of the room.
   My big heavy bookcase was down, but I was lucky; so many were not so lucky. I feared for my family and rushed to my ex-wife’s work: she is an executive officer at a disabled school. The roads were leaking sand and liquefaction. Some cars had fallen into holes as the ground had opened up. The power was down, traffic lights were out and there was mayhem at intersections. A big dog, spooked, was hit by two cars but didn’t survive the third hit.
   At her school, Chrissy was out in the field with the students and their biggest issues was how to ferry disabled ones home: no buses, taxis under pressure, no phone or text contact with parents. No way of contacting parents. They had no idea of the catastrophe around them, especially in the city.
   As I drive to our house, there is another after-shock and the ground, the power poles, walls and earth wobble around violently, liked fiercely shaken jelly. At home, like everyone else’s, our contents and so many of our treasures and worldly possessions shatter in front of my eyes. It’s is no different to any other home in Christchurch—windows, mirrors, glasses, crockery. All broken. But we are alive and will rebuild.
   The streets are gridlocked with those that can leave the central business district. People abandon cars and start running or walk away from danger, desperate to get home to check on family.
   For hours the phones are out, and texting or calls are out. I have a half-hour’s walk to my office but I come across an 87-year-old pensioner, Irene Grenfel. The buses are out, and she is walking 8–9 km to her home. She is frail and cold, pushing a supermarket trolley with two bags. I help her on her way home. We can’t push the trolley through the liquefaction as it’s like soft, wet sand. I lift and carry and help her over intersections where water from the liquefaction is flooding the roads. St Andrew’s College’s playing fields are awash. Hundreds of students are stranded, not knowing how to get home or exactly what to do. Irene despairs as she looks at some of Christchurch’s grandest old homes gapping, collapsed, totally “bombed out”-looking.
   I have not heard if my children are safe and Irene edges closer to home. I flag down a police car and tell her of Irene’s plight and they go to her rescue.
   Power still out, no phones working, and no water. I feel the bruising coming out in my back from the bookcase and feel a little dazed and disorientated. Everything is closed, more buildings collapse in front of my eyes.
   By nightfall, texting is restored. All my family are fine but we have not heard from one of my daughter’s friends in the CBD. We prepare for a long night.
   People are trying to be positive; so many help each other. This is a special and strong community. But a lot of tears to be shed yet. I am still shaking and in shock.—Kip Brook, Word of Mouth Media NZ

Kip Brook is an occasional contributor to Lucire, and a London bureau chief correspondent.