Mischa Barton continues to film and fall down flights of stairs on the set of The Beautiful Life.  You may be aware that I’ll be talking about TBL every day until the premiere in hopes that I can help gather up enough viewers to get two episodes aired.  It’s an ambitious goal, I’m aware.

Check in the gallery for a time lapse of Mischa trying to walk in her Ugg-lies and a pic taken a couple hours later where Ashton Kutcher is stifling a laugh behind Barton’s back.  That, or he was just covering up his nose to block the bourbon stench.

Britney did some shopping on Robertston Blvd. in L.A. yesterday.  She appeared alternately gleeful and morose.  I don’t really care what her mood is as long as I can continue to ignore that huge ring on her left ring finger.  Dudes, she isn’t getting married … is she?  Can we handle a third Mr. Britney Spears?

Pictures in the gallery of Brit in no bra, bad hair, crazy hats and smeared lipstick.  And they said crazy was out.

This morning, I’d like to introduce you to Kelly Sott.  She’s not a household name and she’s not exactly a celebrity.  But she sleeps with celebuspawn Cameron Douglas.  Kelly Sott might also be the dumbest woman in America.

As you may remember, Cameron was just busted for being involved in a country-wide pastry and bath salts meth ring.  Really, not shocking considering his long history of substance-related arrests.  What does surprise me is the fact that he somehow wrangled a house arrest; he’s been staying at the New York City home of his step-mother, Catherine Zeta-Jones.  Sigh … money buys the best justice.

Now, thanks to his fastidious oral hygeine, his ankle-bracelet-monitored-vacation may be coming to an end.  Because even though you’re on house arrest, you can safely assume you are being watched closely, especially when the DEA is involved.  Cameron got in touch with his girlfriend and was really insistent on her bringing his electric toothbrush over to chez Zeta-Jones.  It’s a conversation that I imagine went something like, “When are you bringing me my toothbrush?  I really need it, like, now.  My gum health is suffering.  You’re two blocks away?  Can you hurry up?  I really can’t wait for my toothbrush any longer.”  Sure enough, an electric toothbrush is always an appealing option where there are 19 glassine tubes of heroin stashed in the battery compartment.

So “Kelly Stupid Sott” got busted smuggling heroin to her boyfriend.  She’ll claim that she had no idea there was heroin in the toothbrush — because it’s no red flag when your trial-pending, junkie beau is fixated on the immediate delivery of a toothbrush that has a hollow compartment in it — and he’ll throw her under the bus to keep himself out of jail.  

Ain’t love grand?

Perez Hilton launches his new website, CocoPerez.com, on Thursday. If you go to the website now, there’s only a blank page and a login. But I’m sorta computer-savvy, and his developers clearly are not, and so I poked around a bit to get a first look at the homepage. The rumors have been that this is going to be a website targeting women around the 26-year-old demographic, using “longer-form” editorial content, but what it looks like to me is PerezHilton.com but focusing on the fashion world. I mean, in some of these posts, he’s still drawing on photos. (I think he’s trying to remain true to the brand, but it doesn’t play well with the “more mature audience” concept. Drop that part, Mario.)

The longer-form editorials appear to consist of a paragraph or so more than his traditional pieces. For instance, he ran this piece about the new Harvard clothing line on his current site. The mock-up for the new site includes that same article, but with the last paragraph expanded to say this:

This is all fine and well, but there is one lingering question: why?? This is from so far left field. We would understand if The New School or RISD or any number of artistic/fashion focused schools launched a line – it would still be unusual but at least a logical progression. But this?? This is just so random. Especially since Harvard isn’t exactly thought of as the apex of fashion. This is like Janet Reno announcing she’s launching a line of lingerie. You just can’t get your head around it because it’s so…bizarre.

Well, at least they’ve got our attention!

Ohhhhhh man. Mario, dude, you’re not cut out for “longer-form” editorial. The more you “write,” the more obvious it becomes that you’re a gossip hound and famewhore, but clearly not a “writer.” This concept doesn’t play to your strengths; rather, it exposes your weaknesses. Tell ya what, buddy: You stick to short-form editorial and the Fidel Castro beat, and I’ll handle being funny and insightful for the both of us. Side note: Want me to manage your IT department, too?

So, I’m flipping through the news and I see a headline mentioning “Channing Tatum” and “striptease.” Because I am so obsessed lately with watching West Wing reruns (and pining for Aaron Sorkin), in my head when I read “Channing Tatum” I thought “Stockard Channing” and then I pictured the West Wing‘s First Lady grinding on a pole, Miley-style. So that was funny.

But not anywhere near as funny as the actual Channing Tatum striptease. Apparently about 10 years ago he worked for an all-male revue (with a strict no-nudity policy). This is just like anything you’d see at a standard Chippendale’s show — definitely sexy, but mostly fun and laughable and good-timey and not at all imbued with the intensity and sexuality of a female strip joint.

But ladies — don’t think you’re going to get a piece of Channing again any time soon. He married his Step Up co-star and longtime girlfriend Jenna Dewan in July.

FREAK OUT TIME! You guys, Self magazine digitally altered Kelly Clarkson’s photo for the cover of their September issue. They changed her body and her face so that she looks thinner and prettier. I think we should all get really upset about this and start bitching about the media’s contribution to unhealthy female body images, because this is the first time ever that anything like this has ever happened.

Self’s editor, Lucy Danziger, weighs in on the controversy on her personal blog:

Pictures are meant to tell a story, express a feeling, convey an emotion or capture a moment. Portraits like the one we take each month for the cover of SELF are not supposed to be unedited or a true-to-life snapshot (more on that in a moment). When the cover girl arrives at the shoot, she is usually unmade up and casually dressed, and could be mistaken for a member of the crew or the editorial team in many cases. Once we do her makeup and hair, and dress her in beautifully styled outfits and then light her, we then set the best portrait photographer we can on a road to finding a pose and capturing a moment that shows her at her best. … Then we edit the film and choose the best pictures. This is done in tandem with the star; the creative director, Cindy Searight; the photographer; and myself. Then we allow the postproduction process to happen, where we mark up the photograph to correct any awkward wrinkles in the blouse, flyaway hair and other things that might detract from the beauty of the shot. This is art, creativity and collaboration. It’s not, as in a news photograph, journalism. It is, however, meant to inspire women to want to be their best. That is the point.

Here’s what I think is interesting: Every single cover photo of every single women’s magazine since the beginning of digital technology has been digitally altered. Every. Single. One. That’s basically what Lucy is saying here. They Photoshop Kate Moss. They Photoshop Angelina Jolie. They Photoshop Jennifer Lopez and Tyra Banks and Gisele Bundchen. They Photoshop their bodies and their faces and their teeth and their lips and their lighting and the color of their clothing and their hair and their makeup. This happens always.

Why is the decision to digitally alter Kelly Clarkson such a big deal?

Because Kelly Clarkson is a big girl with an average face, and every woman who stops short of a size two and doesn’t naturally have Angelina lips and a button nose feels a need to defend Kelly Clarkson’s right to be a big girl with an average face. And that’s just fine, but I think it’s worth noting: We don’t throw hissy fits when they digital alter thin and beautiful women. Aren’t we, if anything, unfairly picking on Kelly’s plainness by causing an uproar over this photo?