I've just read an article about Claire Sweeney, who's my age, about to have her first baby and it said that she was advised to have a C-section because of her age.
For various reasons I think it is highly unlikely she was advised this in quite the way its been suggested. Remember it is perfectly possible that she has underlying health issues, which would make it a better option for her too. I strongly suspect that there is more to this than meets the eye...
In terms of whether older first time mothers should be advised like this, there is a debate.
Statistically, the older you get the more likely you are to end up with an assisted birth of some description (instrumental, EMCS or ELCS). At one point www.birthchoiceuk.com had some good statistics which focused on women over 35 only. But they were really hidden away and a pain in the backside to find at the time and the site has subsequently changed. I think it worked out that only 1/3 of women ended up with an unassisted birth.
The reasons behind this are pretty complex - older women are more likely to have more complex medical histories, more likely to have a higher BMI and more likely to be less fit than other age groups, so the figures can be somewhat misleading.
In other words, if you are fit and healthy then there is often very little reason why you should be advised to have an ELCS and it can be more a reflection of other social issues, rather than indicative of women over a certain age.
Imho, I think I would be considering what my overall health was and what my individual preferences were rather than being swayed by what a celebrity has said. If you want a VB then that should be a key part of your thinking.
I think you have to look at the risks of a planned VB which includes the possibility of an EMCS or an instrumental delivery versus a planned CS (statistics often lump CS together and separate instrumental deliveries and EMCS from unassisted VBs which has certain merits, but also is fundamentally flawed in its own right too). These are perhaps the most helpful stats out there - but like I say need to be understood in terms of their weaknesses. It is very easy to get sucked into looking into various stats on the whole, but again you need to properly understand what you are looking at rather than taking them at face value.
All in all, I believe there is a stronger case for first time mothers over 40 to be given free choice over what type of birth they have than other groups - as much as anything else, because they are less likely to have more children (and therefore do not have to consider the risks of subsequent CS). But this should be a choice rather than advice unless there is a particular reason behind it.