Celebrity Privacy vs. Public Interest

[Kei]

[color=darkblue]It's a well-known fact that many television shows and magazines focus on nothing but following the lives of our favorite stars. Entertainment Tonight, Extra!, and People just to name a few. And many time, it may be somewhat interesting to hear about. But though a lot of people do have an interst in what happens in Orlando Bloom's life, just to pull a name out of thin air, isn't there a limit to all of it. After all, celebrities, when you boil down to it, are just regular people who have some fame and (with most cases) a big bank account. They're entitled to thier privacy just as much as anyone else, right? One would believe so. But common interest and public demand drag stars into the limelight, when sometimes, it's the last thing they want. Do you think that the media digs too deep, or not enough?[/color]

[Guest pantalaimon]

YES i do but if people want to be stars its something that comes with fame so if they don't like it they can stop being famous

[Semjaza]

[b]Judge:[/b] "Mr. Simpson, do you have anything to say for yourself?"
[b]Homer:[/b] "Yes, I do. I believe that famous people have a debt to
everyone. If celebrities didn't want people pawing through
their garbage and saying they're gay, they shouldn't have
tried to express themselves creatively."

I think that summarizes it all well.

Really though, they need more limits on those things... but as long as people are interested in seeing fuzzy, far off pictures of celebrities with no make-up on, it's going to keep happening. I don't really get the appeal.

[Guest Crimson Spider]

As many people know, I think that the Media is the root of all evil.

Yeah, they are followed around a lot. Most of the time just from the general public. Like Paparatses (I catn' splel) and stuff who do it willingly.

I really don't see what the interest in their lives really is. Sure, they are rich. But they are just like ours. Waaaaaaah! *throwing tantrum* why don't I get people to follow me around!?

[eleanor]

[size=1] Well, you can't exactly wish for the Media to dissappear. We wouldn't know what was going on.[/size]

[Vertigo]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i]
[B][b]Judge:[/b] "Mr. Simpson, do you have anything to say for yourself?"
[b]Homer:[/b] "Yes, I do. I believe that famous people have a debt to
everyone. If celebrities didn't want people pawing through
their garbage and saying they're gay, they shouldn't have
tried to express themselves creatively."

[/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, I agree. I don't think anyone's personal life should be on the spot because of their profession. Saying that they shouldn't be actors or whatnot if they don't want to be famous is just silly.

[Mist]

[color=crimson][size=1] I really have no sympathy for the rich and famous. You excepted the fact, no, you [i]encompassed[/i] the fact that the media was going to be an annoying part of your life when you decided to chase a fame-bringing career. Too bad that someone's shootin' pictures of you with your fat hanging' over your pants, but hey, they friggin' airbrush you guys so much that it becomes increasingly frustrating to even [b]look[/b] at you (Can anyone say JLO...?)


*shrugs*[/color][/size]

[Juu]

[color=ff00cc] [size=1]Well, both of their jobs depend on each other, considering celebrities need media in order to be celebrities, and the paparazzi need stories and photos in order to sell their stories and photos. And though it's probably really annoying having people follow you everywhere, and take billions of pictures a day... celebrities need that media, good or bad, for more publicity. But then, alot of the paparazzi really should consider their limits, and respect the stars' private lives too. But either way, as long as the Orli pics and stories don't stop, Juu's happy.

^_^[/color] [/size]

[lea]

juu has a good point....the two do depend on each other. cant really have one without the other.
and, yeah, the media should have limits to where they can go....

[Doukeshi]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Juuthena [/i]
[B][color=ff00cc] [size=1]Well, both of their jobs depend on each other, considering celebrities need media in order to be celebrities, and the paparazzi need stories and photos in order to sell their stories and photos. And though it's probably really annoying having people follow you everywhere, and take billions of pictures a day... celebrities need that media, good or bad, for more publicity. But then, alot of the paparazzi really should consider their limits, and respect the stars' private lives too. But either way, as long as the Orli pics and stories don't stop, Juu's happy.

^_^[/color] [/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Yeah, I guess the two kind of need eachother, however there are instances where the media goes too far. This is exactly the reason why the European Privacy Legislation was introduced, following the death of Princess Diana in a Parisian tunnel after being persued by paparatzzi on motorcycles. This shows how the media can go too far in the invasion of people's privacy.

Sure some invasion is necessary for the development of such 'stars', however it is not right to have their lifes continuously splashed across pages of magazines and tv screens ever to the degredation of their own lives. There has to be a limit. If the celebrity does not want their lives invaded then it should be respected. Running around in someones garden with a long lense camera trying to catch pictures of them in their living room eating pizza is not acceptable behavior. Many of us would be arrested for even attempting it...what makes people who work from a newpaper any different?

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by doukeshi03 [/i]
[B]If the celebrity does not want their lives invaded then it should be respected. Running around in someones garden with a long lense camera trying to catch pictures of them in their living room eating pizza is not acceptable behavior. Many of us would be arrested for even attempting it...what makes people who work from a newpaper any different? [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]Ugh. You (and the general populous) have it all wrong :drunk:

The paparazzi gives photographers a HORRIBLE NAME! They're like the cockroaches of the photography world...they're not even photographers but wanna-be's who think that their 500mm lens and spying power gives them the authority to call their stuff "photographs". It's so gross.

Let me get everyone straight on this one: photographers who work for newspapers do NOT do the cockroach thing. Bleh, it makes me sick thinking about it, too. Newspaper photographers take photographs of RELEVANT things, it's the shifty 'picture-takers' from magazines like People, US Weekly, and that other new gossip magazine that create such a blemish on the photography world.

If you pick up a book at your local bookstore, a book like [u]Moments: Pulitzer Prize Winning Photographs[/u], [i]that's[/i] what real photographers do. They document amazing events and amazing stories with great sensitivity and their photographs are BEAUTIFUL. Even if you just look at my website, that's also what news photographers do. We're photojournalists committed to covering events and people in an objective way so as to not convey them in a wrong and disgusting way.

When was the last time that a respected photographer took a picture that ran in a gossip magazine with the caption, "And here's Demi with the dogs. Not looking so fabulous at 40 anymore, are we?" Nope. No self-respecting photojournalist would ever resort to that...:cross:

Yes. That was a huge, raving rant. But I hope I got my point across. Photojournalists who work for newspapers are not to be confused with the slimy things that shadow celebrities and get PAID for it. That still disgusts me so.[/color]

[Chichiri's Girl]

When you decide you want to become a star you should know whats comming. I mean if your a star you're gonna be everywhere. The pics the paparazzi take will make you famous more or less. i mean you wanted to have a face eveyone knew, right? So if you wanna be a star thenI think you're welcoming the paparazii to follow you where ever you go. it's part of the terrtiory. if you don't like it tuff. You're the one who wanted to be famous.

[Doukeshi]

I appologise BabyGirl. but that still doesn't give, what you call, cockroaches the right to do it now does it? I think they're called 'freelance'

[Baron Samedi]

Pantailamon. Once you are famous, you can not just flip a switch and go 'I don't want to be famous now'. It just doesnt work that way. The paparazzi should have a limit, or at least they should be able to be sued or taken to court for breach of privacy/ trespassing/stalking etc.

[Solo Tremaine]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Chichiri's Girl [/i]
[B]When you decide you want to become a star you should know whats comming. I mean if your a star you're gonna be everywhere. The pics the paparazzi take will make you famous more or less. i mean you wanted to have a face eveyone knew, right? So if you wanna be a star thenI think you're welcoming the paparazii to follow you where ever you go. it's part of the terrtiory. if you don't like it tuff. You're the one who wanted to be famous. [/B][/QUOTE]

That comes with it, but believe it or not, not everyone who wants to be famous is doing it simply to be famous, apart from maybe the people you see on [i]Fame Academy[/i]. I know a lot of actors are full of themselves, but the better ones are those who do it because *shock horror* they actually enjoy acting and couldn't care less what anyone else thinks of them.

The point about celebrities is that they are just normal people who we happen to be in a job in which we see them every day on the television, and happen to have a lot of money to swing around as a cause. They are and do exactly the same things as everyone else. I know there are a fair few TV and film stars who shop at my local superstore. Even film stars need groceries.

I'm not saying that they don't expect exposure and invasion per se, but not all of them want it.

I'd half-expect bus drivers or post office workers to be famous with the amount of people who see them every day. The fact that they could be as boring as hell is besides the point. We don't pry into their private lives because their job is in a different context to an entertainment one. We become interested in the characters we see on TV and hence become interested in the person who plays them because we either like or don't like what we see.

But not all famous people are actors- think about all the politicians there are around who get tabloid exposure, not to mention the royal family (at least in the UK, anyway). I think it's better for people to know what politicians get up to because they are representatives of the country as a whole, and people have the right to know if their country's being governed by a drug-snorting, child-beating maniac.

But there is a limit. I do get fed up with seething how Chris Evans has a beer-belly. You could just as easily find some random person on the street and take a picture of their gut and criticise that, too.

After all, the paparrazzi wouldn't want people looking into their houses every day and night, would they? I don't think anyone wants that, unless they happen to be hugely narcissistic.

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by doukeshi03 [/i]
[B]I appologise BabyGirl. but that still doesn't give, what you call, cockroaches the right to do it now does it? I think they're called 'freelance' [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]I'm sorry, I hope you didn't think that I was going off on you; I was going off on the general subject :)

But yeah, you're right, they do call themselves freelancers-- lousy ones at that. However, they are protected under the Constitution's 'Freedom Of The Press', but there have been ones that take things too far.

There's a famous photograph of Jackie Kennedy walking down the street with a paparazzi photographer in her face...she got a restraining order and he couldn't go within 50 feet of her :toothy:[/color]

[Charlie Levoy]

Their has never been a limit to what is told about celeb's, but their should be. Think about it ,your married and you found out that your spouse has cheated on you with another person. Do you want that information in papers for everybody to read. Not are they reading that information, but some of the info is a complete lie. So now not only are they reading about a part of your personal life, but they are reading things that are not even true. There you have it, something that you don't want people to know is being read by everyone and for some half of the stuff that is written is a lie and rumors are being spread. That is just a small example of what happens to celeb. I don't know about you people, but I think that info about them has gone over the deep end here. Don't they deserve privacy like any other human being? If not then why not? Aren't they human like everyone else? I think some people forget that they are exactly like us. That they are human beings like us and that they make mistakes to. I mean if a normal average person had made a mistake or was gay most of us wouldn't really care because that's their buisness not ours. but when a celeb makes a mistake or is discovered to be gay every body has to know and mak a big deal about it. You know what would really help is if ever one ,before picking up some artical about some important person to read, would just stop and think about how you would feel if someone read about your life and then think how that person you were going to read about would feel if you read that information. Now their are quite a few celeb's who love for their fans to know certain information and that's ok. We just have to remember that not every one has that same filosophy. If I have offended any one then I'm sorry and I hope you can forgive me.