madcomments

Telegraph learns Kidman’s not to be sniffed at

Posted in Advertising, Media, Arif Durrani, Latest reporters' blogs December 17th, 2007 by Arif Durrani

We all know that advertising appearances can be a very lucrative pastime for those lucky enough to be involved in the gravy train. Loads of cash for very little work.

There are no subtle reasons for why Jamie Oliver sold his soul to Sainsbury’s, or why Kate – I’m so fussy about the film roles I take – Winslet has suddenly found a love of your mother’s perfume brand Trésor de Lancôme. 

You meddle with this meal ticket at your peril, as the Daily Telegraph found out last week. The national newspaper has paid the price for taking on Hollywood star Nicole Kidman after claiming she preferred another perfume to Chanel no 5, the fragrance she is paid to promote.

In the newspaper’s Spy column last month it was alleged that Kidman said Jo Malone’s White Jasmine and Mint was her favourite whiff. The anonymous column added that Kidman had been “dabbing it on whenever she had a moment” during the London promotions of The Golden Compass.

Kidman’s solicitor, John Kelly, told the high court that the paper accepted the allegations were untrue and added his client had suffered considerable embarrassment and distress.

The paper agreed to pay Kidman’s legal costs as well as substantial undisclosed damages.

David Price, the Telegraph’s solicitor-advocate, was forced to apologise on behalf of the paper.

Enjoying the ride on her high horse, Kidman completed the canter by announcing she will donate the payout and costs to charity Unifem.