Soul-Selling Publicist Howard Bragman Hates It When People Speak Honestly About Him

[flv: 650 400]

It should be noted Howard Bragman, the gay publicist, has done much good for the gays. He’s orchestrated the comings out of folks like Meredith Baxter, John Amaechi, and Sheryl Swoopes, creating a media friendly environment for these folks to reveal what had for so long remained a (sometimes not well-kept) secret. For his latest client, Chely Wright, Bragman delivered arguably the most buzzed-about coming out in history, turning Wright into a household name by being gay when she wasn’t even that as an assumed-to-be-straight person. But Bragman is also the guy who’s been pocketing cash from terrible people like hotelier Doug Manchester, the Prop 8 supporter; it’s been Bragman’s job to woo back the gay dollars to a guy who donated six-figures to rape California’s gays of marriage equality. So Bragman has got his skeletons, which aren’t really in a closet — but he hates when you discuss them. Like Ben Harvey and Dave Rubin did on the Six Pack.

In the latest episode of the radio show, B&D reveal what’s been going on behind the scenes between them and Bragman, who arranged for Wright to sit for an interview with them. Just as he had done for the Today show, The Advocate, and a million other places. But then Bragman pulled rank, criticizing Harvey and Rubin for speaking frankly about how Bragman’s bungled Wright reveal angered much of the Hollywood press corps; he got them the interview, so shouldn’t they owe him? Or so his thinking goes.

(This website isn’t completely removed from the debate, as Ben and Dave say Bragman called out Queerty for inaccurate information — complaints he never shared with us. But maybe he’s just unhappy because Queerty revealed Wright’s identity ahead of time and before anyone else.)

And how. It must be frustrating to be in the business of shaping news coverage and unable to shape news coverage about yourself.

Well, here’s the new episode of Six Pack, with an interview with GLAAD’s Jarrett Barrios, and it’s actually quite nice.

[flv: 650 400]

Listen to the new podcast above, subscribe via iTunes, and check our their archives at Queerty is pleased to power the Six Pack‘s Top To Bottom.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #ben&dave'ssixpack #benharvey #chelywright stories and more


  • Adam

    Queerty (staff),

    Here you have this lifelong advocate of gays, who I know has done a ton of probono work and just overall GOOD, POSITIVE work for gays over the years, and youre nitpicking at him over BULLSH… Take a step back and look at yourselves.

    Your community (I say your because im not a member of the gay community) was too weak to overturn Prop 8 a few years ago, despite outspending Yes on 8. Then you failed to get it on the ballot again in 2k10. You should ask yourselvees — are you fighting the battles that need to be fought?

    What if your LOSER site focused more on issues like Malawi, gay marriage and making some FRIENDS out of people who don’t even know what being gay means and just know its bad because their dictator tells them so?

  • jeff r

    @Adam: If you are going to state that Mr. Bragman has done a “ton of pro bono work” and “good positive work ” for the lgbt community, please provide specific examples of the same. As a publicist, I assume that he gets paid for his work. As an opponent of the lgbt community, Mr. Manchester’s activities have hurt said community and if Mr. Bragman, who I believe is a member of our community, is such a great guy he could easily have refused Manchester’s business. Many others in various service industries have done the same. How do we say “kapo?”

    I think that Queerty and other lgbt blogs have done a great job in servicing their community. Keep in mind that their target audience isn’t in Malawi, or for that matter, Africa. I believe that the issue falls within the realm of foreign policy and international human rights and should really be addressed by our government. Influential celebrities like Madonna and Oprah, who both have long had the support and presumably made money off of our community, and have supported charitable initiatives in Malawi and Africa surely have more clout than Queerty. I would suggest that you direct your concerns to them. Better yet, why not form a charitable group in your community to protest the same. Straight opponents of such barbaric intolerance would presumably have a greater impact on the hearts and minds (or lack thereof in this instance) of Malawi’s government and citizens, no?

    It’s always nice to win the hearts and minds of our fellow US citizens but quite frankly when one is talking about constitutional rights and equality under the law, those concepts should be a given – an inalienable right of all citizens whether or not the general populace agrees with or is comfortable with the same. A sizable segment of the German population supported Hitler’s policies and/or kept silent during his reign of terror – that didn’t make it right. Were the victims of his regime remiss in not mounting an effective PR campaign to preclude their eventual removal to the concentration camps?

    Many service professionals refuse clients because they don’t feel morally comfortable servicing them, if and when they can ethically and professionally do so. I don’t believe that Mr. bragman is professionally required to represent all potential clients who request his services. The possible loss of income might be a hardship but one can always work harder at obtaining additional clients while not selling one’s soul, even Mr. Bragman. By continuing to represent Mr. Manchester I feel that Mr. Bragman is selling his soul for money. He’s certainly free to do so but those in the lgbt community, including Queerty, are also free to criticize his despicable and hypocritical behavior. It is, after all, theoretically a free country

    I suggest you propose the following to the good Mr. Bragman: Since, according to you, he’s such a humanist and charitable fellow, and he obviously is experienced in the workings of the entertainment industry, why doesn’t he write a detailed expose of the homophobia that permeates the entertainment industry, naming names, calling out the worst offenders (studio chiefs, agents, managers, casting directors, producers and directors, etc.?) For free, of course. I am sure that the airing of his knowledge would shock people and hopefully help right some of the wrongs that continue to be perpetuated. Then he would truly qualify as a crusader for good. You can form an organization in the straight community to try and influence the citizens of Malawi to turn their back on such oppressive behavior. Best, Jeff R

  • RomanHans

    Bravo, Jeff!

    I never heard of Mr. Bragman before the Chely Wright outing, but it reflects very badly on him. For weeks he said a major entertainment figure was coming out. Major. MAJOR! Everybody gets excited, we think attitudes are going to change, and then he pulls out the rug from under us. Chely who?

    I’m thinking it means a little more when coming out is a risk, rather than somebody’s only shot at stardom.

    Anyway, obviously Mr. Bragman cares less about the community, or truth, than about money or business. Shame. Well, Mary Cheney can keep him company.

  • Geoff

    wake up guys he is right
    Theres a lot of republicans out there who should be slandered before this guy

  • Joe Blows

    Slander is so inappropriately used in his matter so why don’t you also use terms like “racist” or “bigot” or better yet “babykiller”. I have met Bragman many times over as we are in the same social circle and I have always found him to be obnoxious, overbearing and inappropriate. What is so slanderous about a discussion of why a supposed gay rights advocate and publicists would choose to represent a clearly homophobic person. There’s always the monetary aspect of it and if I’m put in the same situation, I may well do what Bragman did. All they were having is a discussion and Bragman was more the welcome to comment. If this is untrue, then that may be slanderous but there’s never been a denial. If Bragman did it for freedom of speech purposes, then say it. I can see that point of view. But it’s not slander in any way. Truth, my friend, is an absolute defense.

  • jason

    If Bragman is making money off this, I don’t have any respect for him whatsoever. Coming out should be a money-free process.

Comments are closed.