Please Go Easy On Kevin Richards Regarding His Dolly Parton, Whitney Houston Blog
The interweb is an amazing tool, isn't it? It's amazing how just one comment can be either misinterpreted, misquoted, or regurgitated from somewhere else on the web and inadvertently attributed to someone else. I too reacted to the "Dolly Parton Getting Wealthy Off Of Whitney Houston" headline for being unfair to her (Dolly). But I didn't blame Kevin for the headline, and neither should you! And by the way, he reworded his title just to make sure he wasn't misunderstood.
Who knows where things originate on the internet! I originally saw the headline on thefw.com :"Dolly Parton Stands To Make Big Bucks Off Of Whitney Houston's Death" and the International Business Times.com which states : "Dolly Parton To Profit Off Of Whitney Houston". How about this from the Celebrityviplounge.com : "Whitney Houston's Death To Make Dolly Parton Rich" . (That headline can be taken two ways as well, right?) . Then there's the Dailymail.co.uk's very strongly worded "Dolly Parton Set To Rake In More Millions From Whitney Houston's Song".
In defense of Kevin, how else do you say it? You could write: "Whitney's Estate Will Realize Very Little Income From Her Most Famous Hit", but it involves Dolly Parton, so you really want to have her name in there too for Dolly fans. So how would YOU rewrite the headline to make it more fair to both sides?
I can actually see Kevin and everyone else's dilemma here, can't you? It is a fact that Dolly stands to make money - even though she didn't plan it that way obviously!
Let's see what you come up with. Please put your headline idea in the comment section!
And in final defense of Kevin - go back to the top of the home page here and type in "Dolly Parton" in the search. There are 8 pages of blogs on Dolly Parton, and most all written by Kevin. He'd be the LAST to take a pot shot at her purposely - so back off, sister (please).
(Does this mean I can't do a Dolly parody called "I .........Make Money Off You"? - uhh, guess not, huh?)