This image was lost some time after publication, but you can still view it here.

On Wednesday, we passed along a rumor that Kim Masters, Esquire's Hollywood columnist, was let go because "1) she couldn't write and 2) wasn't generating any buzz with what she did write. Also, she kept complaining to them about everything, and they just got sick of her." According to Esquire editor-in-chief David Granger, that rumor was wrong on all counts. Master's column went the way of Gretchen Mol's It-Girl status because "after a while, Hollywood executives are only so fascinating." So true, so true. But give them a snout full of blow and put them underneath a hooker, well, then we're cooking with gas. We digress.

Granger's letter setting the record straight on Masters is after the jump.

Dear Defamer,

I saw your item on Esquire and Kim Masters the other day and quite enjoyed it until I realized it was about Esquire and Kim Masters. Sadly, the only accurate part is that we have retired the column Kim wrote, The Industry. But I'm afraid that had nothing to do with Kim's writing ability (first rate), reporting ability (unmatched), or her "unpleasant" demeanor (she's unusually merry for a writer, as a matter of fact). We put away the column after three years because of the routine evolution of the front of the magazine and because, after a while, Hollywood executives are only so fascinating. Kim's still big; it's Hollywood that got smaller.

Best,

David Granger

Editor in Chief

Esquire

[Photo: Vanity Fair]