People Magazine
reviews and complaints

Your continued support of Amber Heard is disappointing. I used to have respect for People to be unbiased. Amber Heard’s claims could not be verified. She has former abuse charges and DUI charges and her testimony against Johnny Depp had obvious lies. He has medical records. She does not. He has law enforcement support. She does not. He has pictures of being abused and battered and hers all seem to go away the next day.

Person bs Person abuse is what we are all against, regardless of pronouns. Take your head out of the sand and do the right thing. Retract your support of Heard.

This lead story is so disgusting on the queen's jubllee - her day.

Shame on all of you at people magazine who cares about meghan markel, she probably had her own photographer there with her like in texas. There not even part of the morning session. Meghan and harry have done nothing but to try to destroy the monarch. Here you are, leading an email blast with this story. Shame shame on all you.

Meghan markle charms the royal kids as she and prince harry reunite with royal family: see the photos!

A check dated December 21, 2021 no 625 cleared for $50.00 and information was sent twice and I keep getting delinquent bills. This copy of cleared check was sent to your before by email and can also be mailed to you if needed. If not resolved soon I will go to BBB. Your new amount has $70.00 list which is not correct either!

Thanks in advance,

Ron and Sharon McMahon

[protected]

[protected]@yahoo.com

I just received the PEOPLE magazine with Bruce Willis on the front. The magazine is tastefully done however, there is the Fentanyl catagory. All I wanted to weigh in on is if you want more readers, more positive reviews, more ATTENTION... Consider using some of the deaths from our extremely small places most of us know an extraordinary amount of people from everywhere and we are quick to share the magazine which in return brings in more customers and more money. I am from a little place called Rutherford NC which I know personally we have had an extreme amount of fentanyl overdoses. Just a thought to expand your bank account. I have quite a few ideas but that idea is extremely important. I'd be happy to explain more thanks.

I want to complain about the article written this week about the incident involving Will Smith at the Oscars. While the authors do try to include all the facts, their word choices are clearly biased in favor of sympathy towards Smith. In fact, the entire article focuses on reasons to explain why Smith might have behaved as he did, clearly with a goal of engendering sympathy for him. Yes, there are touches of “violence is not the answer,” but this article is biased and infuriating. Chris Rock is mentioned only briefly when his perspective and reaction should have received equal coverage. The authors also included support for Smith from other actors (like Denzel Washington) but completely neglected to include the wave of condemnation from myriad actors and actresses that followed. People Magazine, when covering controversial events, needs to stop championing one side. They are alienating readers like myself.

Signed, Stephanie Marion (a People Magazine reader for over 30 years)

When I click on the daily articles People Magazine sends to my email, I get a message indicating that my browser cannot establish a secure connection to the server, and the articles will not open.

I get this message when using: Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, and Safari, so it does not appear to be a browser problem. It seems the problem is with the L.mail service that People uses to send these emails. The L.mail security certificate seems to not be valid or has expired.

Any subscriber with security software on their computer will be blocked from accessing the email articles. Access to these articles is part of the subscription, so this issue is short-changing subscribers.

Johnny has just received another award. He has an amazing art project Never Fear Truth, yet you People are too afraid to support him. nice

In the February 7, 2002 issue of People Magazine there is a disturbing picture. It may be a shadow, but the effect is the same. I usually enjoy my weekly issue of People, but this picture was really awful! This picture of Courteney Cox shows her sitting crosslegged and seems to show pubic hair and no pants. How could your editors let this picture go to press like that? I thought that maybe I was just looking at it wrong, but I showed it to a few others and they reacted the same wan.

I've subscribed to People for many yrs. There's one thing that I find to be in extremely poor taste & that is the solicitous disclosure of one's age, predominantly with regard to females. I'd understand if age was the basis of the article such as a 90 year old triathlete, but an actress in any old role, or a woman doing charity work, why does age factor in? It is a practice that is both archaic & insulting & criteria enough for my decision to put a stop to subscribing. Shameful & insulting.

I think it is very transparent that people magazine is owned by megan markle and Harry. I am very tired of the coverage on them, especially their victim narrative. Your most recent one is biased and one sided. How about you write about their supporter Amol who was threatening to throw a brick at the duchess of cambridge? But instead you write about others who have a negative opinion about megan and Harry. I was once a fan of theirs but I also have come to realize that due to the bias coverage, that they are liars...proven liars. You cover their "poor me" attitudes but never their horrible behaviors, such as, their perjury in English court. Due to this I have come to realize how bias even things like people magazine are. When we come on here it's because we're tired of news and just want to see some fun celebrity stuff. I enjoy the royals, but I am so tired of American journalism trying to make two of THE MOST PRIVILEGED [censored] (MEGAN AND HARRY) into victims of their own doing. There are real people out there struggling. TWO EX-ROYALS COMPLAINING ABOUT THINGS THEY WALKED AWAY FROM, does not warrant victimhood. So tell meghan and Harry and all your staff to stop trying so hard to make general american people like them. If they truly were authentic they would stop trying to act like royals in America, and be the Hollywood wannabees that they truly are. I want to remind you that we have true american royalties who have earned our respect: Obama, Kennedys, yes...even Beyonce and many more who have earned their place in America's heart for being true to who they are. Megan and Harry are not it. In fact. Just as they have lost respect in united Kingdom, they are losing it here in America too.
So keep trying hard, but America doesn't like disloyalty above all else. Why don't megan and Harry create their own reality TV show like the Kardashians. At least, they will be more authentic than trying to act like royals and humanitarians. At least Kim Kardashian worked hard in law school to help people, while megan and Harry are using the privilege they were given to get what they want.

I am a long time buyer of People magazine. I buy every copy at the grocery store every week. I trust People magazine that they have genuine and true information in their magazine. I also enjoy reading about whats going on with all the celebs. I enjoy the puzzle page and the stories of true crime.
Now, having said that, I have to speak my mind on something that I dislike that keeps happening on an ongoing basis. The subject of "The Royals"! I can't be the only one who thinks that you are reporting too often and giving too much attention to them in your magazine. I would much prefer to read about people right here in the good ol' U S of A! I saw that Mr. Dan Wakeford is from somewhere in the United Kingdom. Could this possibly be the reason for the excessive reporting of The Royals? An article here and there would be expected. However, stories every week is a bit much, don't you think? Thank you for giving me a place to vent.

I used to have a People Magazine subscription, but I got tired of most of the articles being about people like the Kardashians, who I believe are famous for no reason. I want to read about actual talented people who have distinguished themselves with their accomplishments. And no, I do not consider shameless, talentless self-promotion to be an "accomplishment."

So I cancelled my subscription, but occasionally I will still pick up a copy in the grocery store checkout lane, if the cover catches my attention. And that is how I ended up buying the exact same magazine twice.

When Betty White passed away, I picked up the People issue with Valerie Bertinelli on the cover, because there was a teaser about Betty. Then the next day, I saw that a new issue was out with Betty getting the full cover, so I grabbed it, not realizing it was the same magazine! The only difference was the cover. So I paid $11.98, plus tax, to buy two different issues with the exact same content. This should not be legal!

It's certainly unethical, and I feel like I've been stolen from. Because I have. It's thoroughly disgusting.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that I couldn't seem to find a way to email them with my complaint. Sure, there are a bunch of phone numbers, which conjures the image of me being placed on hold all day. No thanks.

People Magazine should just behave in an ethical manner to begin with, and then people won't have to wade through all of the phone numbers just to tell them what they already know - that they're dishonest.

This is now the 4th people magazine i have received which l;ooks like everybody read it going across the usa. This latest one is november 29th 2021 i would like it resent in an envelope to ensure the magazine is in top reading shape. The subscription is quite extreme so i think its final destination should show that. The other issues i dumped as i don't like reading my magazines after someone breathed all over mine

michelle nardi
22942 elkwood st
west hills ca 91304
ppl2126137047

It's very offensive that you are putting a positive spin on Harry and Megan. They lied to the courts and they continue to lie which just shows that your magazine promotes liars. People that commit perjury to a Court should be put in jail not being put on a cover saying they look great in a dress which she didn't. I don't care how much you like her she is a liar so it just shows you're no better. I will never buy another magazine from you again you're pathetic

1) page 87- Javier Bardem's shirt depicts the gator logo ( university of Florida), while promoting the Crocodile movie. 2 different species.
2) page 4-do you think the Big Brother accolades for the first black winner would have been acceptable if the initial conspiracy among the black players had been reversed with all the white players agreeing to guarantee one their own as winner?

In the September 28th article about the college student who died of Covid after refusing vaccination you stated that his organs were being donated. This is not possible given that you cannot donate organs unless you have recovered from Covid for at least 28 days and have had 2 negative Covid tests. Not to mention with a Staph infection it is unlikely the organs were viable.

Let's talk Royals.

One of the front stories was about how M&H acknowledged the 9/11 victims. Then later on People acknowledged that the Queen did. No mention of the many other Royals that did the same thing. People magazine seems to be part of the Omid Scobie "Megan Fan Club". I am tired of seeing People basically promote H&M who have very publicly said they wanted to take a step back. Stop promoting them as Royals when they supposedly want nothing to do with them, expect to stay relevant.
Stop picking sides in this mess….

Be balanced in your reporting.

Hello,
My name is William Sackewitz, and I would like to inform you of an error made in your print issue from 8/30/21 and your online article from 8/19/21 regarding Mrs. Stephanie Williams and her Encircle organization. When referring to the church mentioned in the article, it has been requested that the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is used. This being in harmony with what the church's leader and prophet, Russell M. Nelson has urged the public to do in order to show respect for Jesus Christ and the name of His church. It would be in your best interest to make changes to your article by using resources for the news media at newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org.
In addition, it would be better if your fielded questions to queer individuals who are practicing latter-day Saints. The article gives the impression that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is to be blamed for LGBT teen suicide. However, such claims are simply false and nonsensical. Not to mention insulting to Latter-day Saints who struggle with suicide and self-harm. More focus should be placed on the fact that Utah's perceived "culture of homophobia" as your article put it, is likely due to human imperfections and misunderstandings among the people, not the work of a cold, heartless, monolithic, hateful institution that your writers so eagerly want to display people's cherished belief system as. The overwhelming majority of Utahns are nice and decent people and would never hate someone because of who they choose to be and love. Please consider these suggestions so that your work may better reflect on your company and it's employees.

I'm sick and tired of looking at Jennifer Lopez's face which seems to appear constantly in your magazine. The woman has no concept of what love is, and it seems that she's trying to achieve some kind of world record of broken relationships. Isn't it amusing that just after ending her engagement with A Rod on account of his "roving eye", it sure didn't take long for her to rekindle her romance with Ben Affleck (who we all know foolishly ended his marriage to Jennifer Garner by cheating on her with the nanny). I just feel that Lopez's career is at a slow burn and is desperately trying to seek attention and publicity. What Jennifer Lopez needs is to focus more on her kids and get some counseling. She needs to find out what it means to be in a loving, loyal and solid relationship because she's clueless.

In the article about Reed Drummond weight loss, you used "free reign." Check Merriam Webster. It's "free rein." Please get better copy editors. I know your subject matter is considered fluff, but your English, spelling, and general accuracy shouldn't be.

You can ignore this paragraph, added only because you require 350 words from complainers. I prefer to complain briefly, and do so because I presume your writers and editors are serious about language and care when a mistake slips through. The person who wrote this either had a momentary blackout or is too unfamiliar with the ins and outs of our weird and wondearful Germanic language and the delightful turns of phrases it embraces. As fanciful as is the writing at People, your editors must be well-versed in all turns-of-phrases. If this one slipped through, what's next? Electrical votes, the Sixteenth Chapel, a blabbing brook?