She critiques Us Weekly and the other glossy rags on the newstands she whizzes by in a black SUV. She urges that even though, yes, she is a big time celebrity training to play a latex-clad superhero in a big, big movie, she is just like us. And she offers some statistics from the unfortunately named National Eating Disorders Association that are, of course, sobering: 10 million women and 1 million men suffer from dangerous eating disorders in this stupid country of ours.

So, she'd like to dissuade girls from trying to crash diet like their favorite shiny celebrities. (Don't try this at home, we're professionals.) To drive home the point that she works hard for whatever body she does have, but that she does it healthily and that exercise is good for everyone and magazines lie and ohhh We Are One.

Which is all well and good! If a bit self-important. But at the end she adds the little dig that, we suspect, sparked the whole rant:

I'm not normally the type to dignify toilet paper rags with a response, but in this case I feel it's my responsibility to comment. In a way, I'm glad some dummy journalist (and I use the term "journalist" loosely) is banking on my "deflating" so that I can address the issue straight from my healthy heart.

The 'deflate' refers to this post, written by our own Journalist Ryan Tate, who, tipped off by a Page Six item, noticed some shrinkage. Of boobs.

We support your non-crash-dieting advocacy and condemnation of gross fattie-fat-fat stories.

But we were just talking about your cans, love. Your precious, precious, career-making cans.

Q: Why an entertainment vertical?

A: There is overwhelming demand from customers and members for coverage of celebrity, movies and music. According to PQ Media, the market for outsourced entertainment news content is set to rise by 77% by 2011 to $960 million. So, increasing our entertainment coverage provides an opportunity to give them more of the content they want and to increase revenue at the same time.

SHUDDER. Beyond asking the simple question of how the downturn in ad revenue across media — and thus the resultant belt-tightening, downsizing and shuttering among AP subscribers — squares up with that 77% boost for outsourcers like AP, we'd also like to know: Why a separate organization altogether? Becker notes it's all about the flexibility to "fine-tune" its service, but he sneaks in a bit about a discrete "management structure and P&L" as well. In other words: We're red-headed stepchildren, but at least we're not union stepchildren.

There are some epistemological crises in there, too:

Q: There is a fear that this will take AP closer to tabloid journalism. How will AP ensure it maintains its journalistic standards?

A: The entertainment vertical is not about gossip, unnamed sources and innuendo or about "peephole" journalism with AP photographers becoming paparazzi. It's about recognizing an opportunity to use our journalistic talent and unmatched network of resources to produce high quality, multimedia coverage in an area of growing interest.

Translation: "Did you see South Park the other night? We're going to be just like the photographers outside Britney Spears hospital room, except our captions will I.D. both Stan and Kyle by name. You know — for old times' sake!" Excuse us, we need rush off to stockpile gasoline.

• AP Planning Massive Celebrity Coverage [DHD]