Paris Hilton on National Geographic cover!

It looks like a typical National Geographic cover with the signature yellow border. So what's Paris Hilton doing on there?

The folks at Harvard Lampoon persuaded employees of one of the most respected magazines to help them ensure their April Fool's parody - with stories on Mongolia's wildest waterparks and Native Girls Gone Wild - looked authentic.

The issue, coming out on Tuesday, is the latest in a string of Harvard Lampoon magazine parodies.

But the undergraduate group had never done National Geographic, which quickly responded when contacted by the students last summer.

"My guess was they were just extremely bored and they were tired of working with animals and scientists and wanted to hang out with college students," said Hayes Davenport, who edited the magazine with fellow Harvard senior Ross Arbes.

Davenport said other publications have helped with their parodies in the past, such as when USA Today printed the Lampoon's version on its press in 1989.

And he said National Geographic's staffers - who had no editorial control over the parody - were eager to make fun of their ultra-serious image.

The magazine helped print the parody and distribute it alongside its own April edition in some areas, Arbes said.

A designer also helped lay out the parody to make it look as much like the original as possible.

"They provided things that were really valuable to us," Arbes said.

Editors from National Geographic could not be reached on Monday, but the magazine released a facetious statement.

"Editors are unavailable for comment, having left the country ... as usual," it said.

- Yahoo News

Lindsay Lohan was the Family Cash Cow

Lindsay Lohan's former bodyguard has revealed that her parents have to be blamed for the starlet's bad behaviour, for both Michael and Dina Lohan ‘were wild, abusive, neglectful partiers'.

Tony Almeida, who worked with the Mean Girls star between 2002-2005, has opened the lid on how she had to deal with her parent's alcohol and drug related abuses from a young age.

"From a young age, she dealt with her father's physical, emotional and drug abuses as well as her mother's drinking,” the New York Post quoted him, as saying.

Citing one incident, he said that once a furious Michael Lohan had ‘slammed on the brakes and dragged her out of the car, pushed her up against the hood, screamed at her and called her a slut on the Long Island Expressway.'

Almeida ‘got in the middle of it and pulled him off.'

“(Meanwhile, Dina often) let her do whatever she wanted, just to keep her happy and working... [At her 16th birthday party] Lindsay drank whatever she wanted - I saw her drinking beer and mixed drinks with my own eyes [without Dina's intervention],” he added.

The ex-bodyguard also said that Dina looked at the starlet as a cash cow. Dina was desperate to become a star herself and received 10 percent of Lindsay's income.

"Lindsay was the family cash cow - and she resented it, They counted on her to pay their bills... I saw Lindsay exhausted, begging her mother for some time off,' he said.

When Lohan was 15, they allowed her to share a room with her then boyfriend Aaron Carte, for they were glad that she found someone who could help her in her singing career.

"They knew Lindsay was sleeping in Aaron's room. But they seemed happy she had chosen somebody who could benefit her singing career,” he added.

Rowling loses fight over son's photo

JK Rowling has lost a battle in London's High Court to ban the publication of a picture of her son David. He was photographed at the age of 20 months in Edinburgh, Scotland along with her- the photo was printed by the Sunday Express.

Rowling claimed the child's right to privacy was infringed and sued the newspaper and the agency that provided the picture, in the attempt to stop future publication.

Yesterday, the judge said that the law did not provide celebrities with "a press-free zone for their children in respect of absolutely everything they choose to do."

Rowling and her husband Neil Murray said they were, "Disappointed by the judgement, which seems to have misunderstood our claim."

"Our aim has only been to protect our children from press intrusion during their childhood. We see no legitimate reason why, as in this case, David, who was less than two years of age at the time, should have his photograph taken and then published in the press."

"We take his, and that of his siblings, privacy and safety very seriously." Rowling says she will appeal.