December 3, 2011 by staff
Gwyneth Paltrow, If I were on the deciding committee of one of those “end of the year” lists, I swear, I’d be fired, because, clearly, I’ve got it all wrong. First, the Kardashians wind up on Barbara Walters’ 2011 list of the “Most Fascinating People,” and now Gwyneth Paltrow winds up on GQ’s “Least Influential People of 2011″ list. Up is down. Down is up. I don’t know what’s happening anymore. Where am I?
According to StarPulse, the editors at GQ chose this list by selecting “celebrities who’ve failed to contribute something of ‘value’ to the world.” Paltrow made the cut by “unleashing her awful cookbook on the world.”
I certainly don’t claim to be president of the Gwyneth Paltrow fan club, but really? Weren’t there celebrities who contributed less than her?
I know Gwyneth Paltrow can be annoying — hell, I’ve blogged about her being annoying, but … not everybody feels this way. In fact, I have friends — perfectly normal friends — who think her cookbook is just tops. That’s influence whether we like it or not. And, sure, her lists of pretentious, totally unaffordable things are irritating to us, but to some high-falutin’ person out there, they’re useful.
I think if Gwyneth should wind up on any list this year, it should be a list of the “Most Unrelatable People.” I don’t think that exists, but if it did, she’d be perfectly suited for it. Most people can’t relate to her, but those who do, well, I’m sure she’s got some influence over them.
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.