22 Oct 07
As much as I am sure no one really cares of the trials and tribulations of being a celebrity, but do we really need to know every aspect of their lives such that they are forced to run the gauntlet of a media scrum at every turn with papparazzi stalking their every move. I know some in the spotlight use this interest to their advantage, but what rule or what human right is upheld by having the rights of a minority so flagrantly abused.
Whatever your opinion may be of the late princess of Wales, its probable she would still be here if it were not for our need to know or speculate about all the minutiae of her very un private life.
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by kmax87On the contrary, once she upset the royals she'd have been "removed" much quicker had the media spotlight not been on her every movement.
Whatever your opinion may be of the late princess of Wales, its probable she would still be here if it were not for our need to know or speculate about all the minutiae of her very un private life.
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by kmax87My understanding was that they were driving too fast without wearing seatbelts. Were they driving too fast because of paparazzi? I don't think so. If her death is your main concern here then you should worry more about speeding laws and seatbelt laws than you should about privacy laws.
Whatever your opinion may be of the late princess of Wales, its probable she would still be here if it were not for our need to know or speculate about all the minutiae of her very un private life.
As for privacy, I believe that everyone has some right to privacy and that whatever the desire of the media and its viewers, everyone should have the right to be protected from prying eyes in certain situations (in their homes for example).
22 Oct 07
It's not that we have a right to know - it's that people who see her on the street have a right to say they saw her on the street. Which, boiled down to its legal essentials, is all the press really does to celebrities. They see a celebrity, they tell us about it. Obviously if it happens to you every day it seems like a real pain but it's very, very hard to curtail the practice without violating certain free speech protections that are important to us.
22 Oct 07
Originally posted by darthmixThe problem is separating free speech from harassment.
It's not that we have a right to know - it's that people who see her on the street have a right to say they saw her on the street. Which, boiled down to its legal essentials, is all the press really does to celebrities. They see a celebrity, they tell us about it. Obviously if it happens to you every day it seems like a real pain but it's very, very hard to ...[text shortened]... tail the practice without violating certain free speech protections that are important to us.
I have the right to say you are a moron.
I do not have the right to follow you around all day screaming that you are a moron.
Paparazzi fall more in the second category.
23 Oct 07
You absolutely have the right to follow me around in public. Your behavior only becomes harassment if you threaten me, or behave in an intimidating or frightening manner, or actively prevent me from conducting my personal business. Taking my picture doesn't count as harassment, since on a public street I have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Obviously paparazzi do often go right up to the line of these laws, and sometimes they cross it. But what paparazzi do is essentially legal, and you can't really ban it without infringing on fundamental freedoms.
10 Nov 07
Originally posted by kmax87You choose to put yourself in the public eye, you take the rough with the smooth, basically.
As much as I am sure no one really cares of the trials and tribulations of being a celebrity, but do we really need to know every aspect of their lives such that they are forced to run the gauntlet of a media scrum at every turn with papparazzi stalking their every move. I know some in the spotlight use this interest to their advantage, but what rule or what ...[text shortened]... t were not for our need to know or speculate about all the minutiae of her very un private life.
It's a whore's bargain. No point coming home complained you got shafted.
10 Nov 07
Originally posted by kmax87It is simply really. It is merely supply and demand. Those who are famous are of interest to the rest of the populace at large, therefore, there is a market for investigating such celebrities. It is the price of fame. It has nothing to do with right and wrong, rather, it is simply business.
As much as I am sure no one really cares of the trials and tribulations of being a celebrity, but do we really need to know every aspect of their lives such that they are forced to run the gauntlet of a media scrum at every turn with papparazzi stalking their every move. I know some in the spotlight use this interest to their advantage, but what rule or what ...[text shortened]... t were not for our need to know or speculate about all the minutiae of her very un private life.
10 Nov 07
Originally posted by whodeyI preferred my summary :p
It is simply really. It is merely supply and demand. Those who are famous are of interest to the rest of the populace at large, therefore, there is a market for investigating such celebrities. It is the price of fame. It has nothing to do with right and wrong, rather, it is simply business.
10 Nov 07
Originally posted by kmax87I think the question should be: "Why do so many people care about celebrities to the extent that they do?"
As much as I am sure no one really cares of the trials and tribulations of being a celebrity, but do we really need to know every aspect of their lives such that they are forced to run the gauntlet of a media scrum at every turn with papparazzi stalking their every move. I know some in the spotlight use this interest to their advantage, but what rule or what ...[text shortened]... t were not for our need to know or speculate about all the minutiae of her very un private life.
I can understand infatuation with politicians. You want to know if they're hypocrites. But "normal" celebrities? Why would anyone care?
10 Nov 07
Originally posted by darthmix"You absolutely have the right to follow me around in public."
You absolutely have the right to follow me around in public. Your behavior only becomes harassment if you threaten me, or behave in an intimidating or frightening manner, or actively prevent me from conducting my personal business. Taking my picture doesn't count as harassment, since on a public street I have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Obvious ...[text shortened]... is essentially legal, and you can't really ban it without infringing on fundamental freedoms.
That's called stalking where i come from. You don't have to harrass or threaten.
Granny.
11 Nov 07
Originally posted by shavixmirWell, if you become "a celebrity", you are in effect trading your personality for wealth and influence and fame. So, pretty much, it's in the nature of being a celebrity.
I think the question should be: "Why do so many people care about celebrities to the extent that they do?"
I can understand infatuation with politicians. You want to know if they're hypocrites. But "normal" celebrities? Why would anyone care?
I blame Byron. But then, sooner or later, good lad that he could be, i always do.
12 Nov 07
Originally posted by shavixmirI don't get it either.
I think the question should be: "Why do so many people care about celebrities to the extent that they do?"
I can understand infatuation with politicians. You want to know if they're hypocrites. But "normal" celebrities? Why would anyone care?
13 Nov 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI think its pretty straightforward. Its getting harder to make a living and as more and more people get trapped behind finance payments and the reality of mindless work, in no part thanks to the technological revolution that has seen fit to remove much of the drudgery from our lives but also increasingly making us a generation of data entry personnel, leaves us little satisfaction from having a job well done.
I don't get it either.
Add to that the rise of infotainment as news as a most pervasive influence on how the consumer mindset is constantly being stroked, its little wonder that to keep us feeding in the trough more and more prurient detail is being aimed at younger and younger generations. Sure we on this board as older chess playing geeks might not see the attraction, but there is a market out there that has been fed a steady diet of this steroid enhanced second life that its no wonder that we see the boundaries of private space being increasingly encroached by those identified as public people.
My concern is that while it is only happening to our public idols, we are having our sense of private boundaries incrementally eroded until it will only be a matter of time before we may be unperturbed when a similar form of privacy invasion accosts us all.