Where would the tabloids be without the British Royal Family?

Burning Man announced that its theme for 2020 is The Multiverse, which seems appropriate for this week’s crop of truth-defying tabloids, which in an infinite number of possible universes might actually be accurate in one of them.

Assuming facts not in evidence is a time-honored courtroom objection, and one which could be stamped on almost every page of this week’s tawdry tabloids.

“Shocking charge blows lid off 22-year cover-up” screams the cover of this week’s National Enquirer. “Diana’s Killer Found!”

There’s a baby boom exploding in Hollywood - but don’t expect to see any of the infants, which exist only in tabloid imaginings.

The British Royal soap opera continues with fantastic and implausible plot twists, if you believe this week’s fact-challenged tabloids.

You go away to Burning Ban for a couple of weeks of desert heat, wind, dust and EDM-fueled contemplation, and return to find the tabloids in dire need of a personal transformative experience of their own, still spouting the same fever dream imaginings as before.

Tabloid reporters must live in a constant state of paranoia if this week’s offerings are any indication.

The tabloids are routinely filled with news you can’t use, but it’s intriguing to find that their pages are also filled with ads for products nobody needs.

World War III is coming - hold the eighth page!

How long does it take to dig a hole six feet deep and eight feet long using just a fork?

We're through the looking glass and down the rabbit hole in this week’s tabloids that give Alice in Wonderland a run for her money in their wild imaginings.

It’s the start of July, but it already feels like August in the tabloids, which this week reek of nothing-happening-desperation.

If the British Royal Family is a reality TV show, the tabloids are their unseen scriptwriters.

You’re a tabloid reporter and you’re used to fabricating many of the “facts” and “quotes” in your stories, but there are some days when you can’t even be bothered to do that with any conviction, days when your fevered imagination doesn’t have the energy to get out of bed.

So you get what we see in this week’s tabloids.

George & Amal Clooney are "Dating Other People!” reports the ’National Enquirer,’ in an “Exclusive" inspired by the Clooneys announcing a charity fundraiser offering the winner a private dinner with the celebrity couple at their home in Italy.

The ‘Enquirer’ amazingly interprets the Clooneys' altruism as “an excuse to ignore their wedding vows,” suggesting that the couple are wife-swapping swingers for charity, and that George has “opened the door to other men to enjoy the company of his leggy 41-year-old wife!” Expect the Clooneys to fire off an uncharitable lawsuit any minute now.

The ‘Globe’ cover’s obligatory story about the British Royals boasts: “Explosive Police Dossier Found! Charles’ Motive For Murdering Diana!” Prince Charles allegedly had Diana killed because she was scheming to have him bypassed by the Queen so that the crown would go to son William after QE!!’s death. Which makes no sense: As we’ve noted before, The Act of Settlement of 1701 demands that the monarch’s male heir succeed to the throne no matter what anyone wants. Moreover, Diana was divorced from Charles and anathema to the Palace at the time of her demise, so there’s no way the Queen would have done Diana’s bidding. Read the rest

“RFK Second Shooter Found!” screams the cover of this week’s ‘Globe,’ revealing the identity of the “girl in a polka-dot dress” seen leaving Robert F Kenned's assassination scene in 1968.

The recent redefinition of the kilogram based on quantum physics and Planck’s constant has had major ramifications in this week’s tabloids, where such weighty issues as celebrity body fat and how many Angelina Jolies it takes to make up one Brad Pitt are the subject of intense scientific debate.

But even the measurement of mass using universal verities about light and energy doesn’t come close to the level of accuracy achieved by the former Guess-Your-Weight fairground carnies who can pin-point a celebrity’s weight sight unseen with zero margin of error.

This week the tabloids bring us the formula (A - 17) x 2 = B - 20, where “A” is Angelina Jolie three months ago, 17 are the pounds she’s reportedly lost in the past few weeks, “B” is Brad Pitt in 2018, and 20 are the pounds he’s lost lately.

Jolie, who earlier this year was reportedly a slender 97 pounds, has dropped to 80 pounds according to the mathematical geniuses at the ’National Enquirer,’ who claim that her six “scared kids” are “begging her to eat.”

In the other half of the equation, the ‘Globe’ reports that “Bony Brad is Wasting Away!” Jolie’s ex may be suffering “manorexia.” says the rag, using the scientific term for an eating disorder rarely found outside of academic medical journals. If a page falls out of an atlas has it undergone a mapendectomy? Just asking. Pitt has reportedly dropped 20 pounds, so that he is now a mere 160 pounds.

All of which answers the question which has perplexed mathematicians almost as long as Fermat’s Last Theorem: how many Angelina Jolies does it take to make one Brad Pitt? Read the rest