The Paparazzi and the Press

[smitten_by_twilight]

Good heavens, I hope Kristen's ok (sounds like just a fender bender) ... but I'd be willing to bet that few to none of the papz mentioned whether she was all right or not. And I can't even imagine not feeling like I could walk around my own ****** house, for crying out loud.

[Chernaudi]

@ Tornado: I saw it on IMDB, and the Kristen Stewart fan Facebook page. I see tabloid mags as being little more than toilet paper pretty much.

@ smitten_by_twilight: That is pretty disturbing. Most of the IMDB stories did say that Kristen was fine, but the paps have always camped near Kristen/Kristen's parents' home. I don't think that they've found out where Kristen's own home is, but they tend to stake out her parents' place when she's there.

These people need to get a life. Seriously, I know that one of the IMDB stories said that the paps need to feed their families. I know that the econony is crap now, but seriously, please, do yourself and the world a favor, paps, and get a real frickin' job!

[Tornado]

I don't know if all the stuff going on with the News of the World shutting down will have an effect on the media overall. Certainly there's every reason to believe that that kind of behaviour is standard for tabloid journalism. Hopefully, this will lead to a full investigation into the way the press oversteps the mark. I mean, I can understand that they might need to do things like phone tapping if it's a question of bringing down a corrupt government, but really, the family members of crime victims? It's not only unnecessary, but immoral and unethical.

[Chernaudi]

The tabloid media tends to be amoral as far as getting their stories--they don't care how they get them, and if they can't find something that has a wisp of legitimacy to it, they often try and make something up.

And, of course, the guy who owns News of the World also owns Fox News Corp. I already don't like what he's done to Speed Channel in the US (made it an all NASCAR, F1 and reality show network--why watch the "Car Show" when I can watch the same stuff on Top Gear on BBC America?), but that's water under the bridge here! NotW really sets the standard as far as seedy tabloid journalism.

And American Media Inc, who owns most American tabloids, isn't much better.

I'm all for freedom of press and freedom of speech, but freedom isn't free, and there has to be logical limits.

[Tornado]

It's the same all over the place. The Australian press have a reputation for underhanded tactics that rivals most countries. They have been known to stoop as low as they can. On another forum I used to visit regularly one of the girls there had a terrible tragedy strike, when her daughter and one of her daughter's friends committed joint suicide. The resulting behaviour of the press towards her and the other girl's family was inexcusable. One of them contacted the father of the other girl and said that if he didn't give them an exclusive interview they would publish an article about his daughter that revealed all kinds of sordid details about her private life. I mean, how can you sleep at night when you're making money by threatening a grieving father like that?

[Chernaudi]

I say off with their heads--in so far as to kill this snake, go for the head. And by head, I mean money. Don't buy their mags, get the government and banks to freeze their funding, and they'll go away. But not as long as these morons know that they can cash in on horsecrap.

Freedom isn't free, and it's not to be abused. I know that US Army Air Force, Royal Air Force, and RAAF fighter pilots didn't take their P-51 Mustangs and pour ammo from their plane's 6 .50 caliber Browning machine guns into Nazi and Imperial Japanese aircraft for the freedoms that they were fighting for to be exploited and abused like that. If some of those guys who were fighting for freedom of their homelands and those of others read this crap, they'd be ashamed. And I don't think I'd have to tell you what those war vets would think should happen to the tabloid people.

I'm with you, these people would have to be sick and insane to sleep at night, but I guess that money is the sleeping pill.

As far as I'm concerned with these people, go on You Tube and type in "FPSRussia Courtesy" in the search box and listen this guy's comments (from the video posted by the user FPSRussia). I think that you'll agree with his comments and how they apply to the paps and tabloid people (hint, it's not really safe for work or young children, and even though it's funny, it's also seriously true).

The vid's called "(Not so) Common Courtesy" and his rant starts about 30 seconds in.

[Tornado]

Yes, what's really required is for the public to stop buying mags with those kinds of articles in them, but unfortunately, that's easier said than done. People don't see the link between their celebrity idols being harrassed by photographers and the fact that they are paying for mags with photos taken by those very same photographers. I guess it's easy to ignore the link if the articles are telling you things you really, really need to know!

[Chernaudi]

But do we really need to know what Kristen and Rob are doing in their private lives? That goes back to the common courtesy thing. You wouldn't want people you don't want to prying in your private love life with your boyfriend/husband, wouldn't you? As human beings, why should they expect anything different? Wanting people to know what's going on there is you two's choice, not the press or the media or anyone else.

It goes back to the golden rule--treat others they way you'd like to be treated. It seems, as Kyle/FPSRussia said in his video, that manners, the golden rule, and common courtesy has gone out the window for a lot of people, especially when money is on the line.

My mom used to buy me tabloid mags because they had photos of Cher in them, but she stopped after she bought me a few of them, because she realized the connection to her money and them selling their magazines.

I think that sometimes, a NASCAR-style "boys have at it" policy should be adopted against the paps and tabloid people. What do I mean by that? Do I mean that we should protest and retaliate against them the way that the Weather Underground tried to against the Fort Dix US Army base by attempting to nail bomb the base (and destroying the NYC townhouse where the bombs were being made in the process) or a similar attack that the IRA sucessfully made at Hyde Park and Regent's Park against officers and enlisted men in the British Army during parades and concerts? NO! Am I saying that we should initiate violent confrontations with them, like shooting them, stabbing them, and instiagting fights. Again, my answer, as much as some of these guys may deserve to have the crap knocked out of them, is no, unless they initiate the fight.

What I mean by retaliating against them is use their own tactics against them. Talk trash and smack against them and expose them for who they really are, if they get agressive, send them a polite but firm message that their behavior isn't tollerated. And if they get pushy, you have to be willing, if worse comes to worse, to push back and hold a line until the proper authorities can break it up. And that doesn't mean doing as someone apparently did today and initiate a fight when he tried to punch out Rupert Murdoch. If these guys throw the first punch, at least in my country, they're usually the guilty party, and the one who'll get into trouble.

It's all about rasing your voice enough to send a message, get your point across, and making the punishment fit the crime, nothing more, nothing less.

And you may think that I'm kinda militaristic about my view points or that I'm really conseravtive, and I'm diffenently a conservative when it comes to fiscal matters and, in my country at least, firearms laws and firearms owners' rights. But I'm socially liberal (and on many issues, once you get to know me, I can be very liberal) enough to know that violence only can bring more violence and with that, violence should be the last resort when all else fails.

Problem is, there's enough people who are stupid enough or ignorant enough to not understand that point. Change can be brought about peacefully, and you can send your message without hurting other people. As Kyle said in that video, my view point is that you're polite to people you don't really know (and really, how well do we really know Kristen and Rob, and the rest of the cast?), and it's only when people become totally unsufferable (like the paps) that it's time to send them a message to back off. How far they want to escalate it is in their hands, but some of the confrontations between fans and paps/tabloid people have nearly turned violent, and only by cooler heads prevailing, they didn't turn violent.

However, that being said, I'm not gonna feel very sorry for a pap or tabloid due who gets nailed a good one by a fan who his tactics rubbed the wrong way. I know that it may sound like an oxymorinc statement, but you just can't feel a ton sorry for someone who brings a lot of crap on himself whilest he knows that he's doing wrong.

Wheeeel, that was quite a rant by me. But I felt that I had to clear up some points and make how I feel known. I don't endorse violence against anyone unless all other options have been exhausted, no matter how deserving they may actually be, and I'm not against freedom of speech or freedom of press, but some things are best left unsaid, and are best not to be prodded for. But one day, these people are gonna have to realize that they've made their beds and will have to lay in them, because freedom of speech and press isn't free, and works both ways--they have the freedom to do what they do, and we have the freedom to call them out on it.

[Tornado]

But do we really need to know what Kristen and Rob are doing in their private lives? That goes back to the common courtesy thing.

Yes, I know. I was being ironic. Hence the

I think that sometimes, a NASCAR-style "boys have at it" policy should be adopted against the paps and tabloid people. What do I mean by that? Do I mean that we should protest and retaliate against them the way that the Weather Underground tried to against the Fort Dix US Army base by attempting to nail bomb the base (and destroying the NYC townhouse where the bombs were being made in the process) or a similar attack that the IRA sucessfully made at Hyde Park and Regent's Park against officers and enlisted men in the British Army during parades and concerts? NO!

Phew! Glad to hear it!

The whole thing is a very volatile issue, and it's difficult to know what can be achieved at all.

I don't believe any violent response, whether in response to violence, or off its own bat, is helpful. The answer is education. Trying to educate as much of the public (and it is the public who need to be educated in this) in why it is not a good thing to buy mags with pap photos of their favourite celebrities in them. For a start, it could, quite literally, get their favourite celebrity killed. Unfortunately, making people realise this possibility and that it is THEIR behaviour that will decide whether or not it happens, is hard.

When the Princess of Wales was killed there was some soul searching, but it didn't really go very far, and at the time I was disappointed that more onus wasn't put on the consumer as a responsible party. I can guess why Earl Spencer didn't want to label the person on the street as being responsible for his sister's death, but if we don't buy the magazines with our favourite celebrities in them, the paps will stop pursuing them, because they don't make them money.

And making people aware that they could, in all honesty, be responsible for Rob and Kristen's lives just because they choose to buy a magazine is difficult, but it's true. The paps could cause an accident. It's happened before, and there's no doubt in my mind it will happen again. The more they pursue someone the more that person's life is at risk.

[Chernaudi]

Of course, if something should happen to Kristen or Rob, that can result in the very type of street justice--maybe not as extreme, but It'll still likely happen in some form--that I was referring to. Just because someone deserves to have violence brought against them doesn't neccessarily mean that it's right.

But then again, we pay our local, state, and federal governments tax money to protect all people--every innocent person is entitled to equal protection under the law.

And it's not just the aspect of Kristen or Rob getting hurt or worse that these people need to worry about--other ethical stances need to be considered.

Innocent people can get injured and die because of the stuff that the paps can do. And I really wonder if some of these people really know where there money is going? To the scumbag who owns the company who owns the mags (and if such companies are publically traded and people buy into their stock, that would be disgraceful), who gives it to the scumbags who write their trash and the scumbags who stalk out celebs.

I do feel that governments should crack down on these tactics and exert pressure to get these people to stop what they're doing. That's the consumer advocacy role that the government should exert. The Federal Trade Comission a few years ago sued several diet pill companies for selling potentally dangerous products, as well as products that didn't live up to their claims and were put out there just to milk people out of money. That's what tabloid magazines are! A device to spew crap and rip people off!

That's why Kristen's "rape comment" horsecrap got blown out of control. She was criticized because a tabloid gossiper made fun of her and that comment in an article she wrote. How frickin' ignorant people are today! They trusted a tabloid writer over Kristen, someone who's stood up for women's rights and took time out to talk with sex abuse victims and has donated more time and money to such causes than most "organizations" have! I wonder if after Kristen applogzied if they applogized for overreacting (which they did), and if they know what fools they made themselves out to be to a public who actually understood largely what actually was going on for once?

I do believe that the government has a responsibility to regulate some of this stuff, but aside from arresting paps for causing a car accident or a distrubance, what else can they do?

It's just like a disaster--they government has to at least attempt to help out, but you gotta take care of yourself too. That's why Kristen and Rob have gaurds, why film companies have private security (or are supposed to), and why fans have at times stood up to the paps and tabloid people.

I don't want any confrontations to become violent, but that's sadly what it might take for the paps to learn their lesson, and might take a person's favorite musician or actor/actress to get hurt or worse, or innocent people to get hurt or worse, for the government and themselves to take action. Sad, but true, that seems to be human nature--keep the status quo until something happens.

PS: @ Tornado: I know that you were being sarcastic. But the reality is do the people we're commenting on see that distinction? There's just too much of this "being famous makes you different" crap goin' around in my book amongst these people.