My email to The NY Post's Page Six column

It pains me to waste precious moments of my life defending that no-talent whore Paris Hilton, but my issue is more with MULTIPLE inaccuracies in today's lead Page Six story about Hilton's Billboard chart positions. The article completely distorts the truth with both wrong facts and suggestive wording. First of all, while 75,000 copies in its first week certainly isn't Eminem-level, it's still disturbingly good for a vapid, dirty whore with no previous musical pursuits...and enough for a Top 10 debut. To compare it to last week's debut from Christina Aguilera is ridiculous...apples and oranges. One's a music superstar vet, the other's a dumb slut whose name we only know because gossip columns like yours inexplicably thrust her down our throats. Secondly, you then say her album is "languishing at the bottom of Billboard's Hot 100." Well, it's gonna debut at like #6...hardly the bottom of any chart. And it's the ALBUM chart it'll be on...NOT the Hot 100. The Hot 100 is the SINGLES chart. Lastly, you say second single "Turn It Up" isn't doing well, either. Moving past separate issues with the word "either," it's actually not even RELEASED yet beyond the dance clubs...where's it's actually racing toward #1...a prized position first single "Stars Are Blind" also found itself in. Again, I hate Paris Hilton. Have I made that clear? But I hate blatant, totally unnecessary printed untruths even more...particularly in a NYC paper. It pisses me off. Anyone in the music biz with half a brain surely found the article equally laughable. A little fact-checking would make you a hell of a lot more credible. As it stands now, i'll be taking what I read in Page Six with even more of a grain of salt than I used to.