The Paparazzi and the Press

Where we discuss and converse on topics that have meaning that transcends the Twilight Universe

Moderator: Openhome

Forum rules
Click for Forum Rules

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Jennie Malone » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:50 pm

Thanks, Marielle -- I think the parallel between Rob's and Kristen's real-life experience with the vampire archetype and their fictional depiction of vampires in the Twilight serves as a great reminder that in ALL things, there is a literal level as well as a symbolic level. (In this case, for example, Rob and Kristen literally play vampires in a movie, and symbolically, they are struggling with the vampire archetype in the media frenzy.) I think those kinds of parallels happen in life for ALL of us, and it is incumbent on us to look for those archetypal experiences to discern what we are supposed to learn about ourselves.

Applying that, I hope Rob and Kristen get through this phase in their careers with their sense of dignity and humility intact, and if they do, the experience will have given them first-hand proof (for themselves) that they really ARE capable of managing super-stardom without losing themselves. Often we don't believe the best about ourselves until we see proof of it, so I think that's why God (or the Universe, or whatever you're comfortable calling it) sets up those archetypal experiences so that WE know what we're capable of :)

Chernaudi, thanks again for starting this topic -- the media experience, while it is definitely Rob's and Kristen's personal battle with the worst of all vampires, will serve them well if they maintain a symbolic perspective long enough to see their strength and groundedness as their means of "survival" from the vampire's clutches. When I said "God speed," I sincerely meant it because they will need all the help they can get before this frenzy is over with!!
Jennie Malone,
Twilight Saga Archetypes
http://twilightsagaarchetypes.com
Jennie Malone
Settled in Forks
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 7:37 pm

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby smitten_by_twilight » Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:00 am

Still a bit of a newbie here, and checking out this thread for the first time ... let me know if anything I say is uncalled for.

Great thread and great thoughts on this always relevent topic. I have always been amazed that after Princess Diana's DEATH the paparazzi barely slowed down. I have never been a big frequenter of tabloids, but as I have learned more about the extent to which these celebrity-stalkers (words like journalist and photographer seem too dignified) go, I have frequented them less and less. I will say that I think that video sites like YouTube can go a long way towards educating the general public about these issues. I am a recent Twi-fan, and when I started hearing about how bad the stalking was, checked out 2 papparazzi videos, one of Kristen and one of Ashley ... and never will again. I admire how well they and their family/friends handled it, and have no desire to support the stalkers' behavior.

Jennie, I love the comparison to vampires. Reading through these posts I find I agree with most everything - fans voluntarily not supporting papparazzi, better legislation, police support, awareness that just because actors are famous for their jobs does not mean that it's ok that they be hounded. But I got a little distressed at everyone's acceptance that we can't expect better behavior from the papparazzi - maybe because I shared this belief. We certainly can't COUNT on better behavior. But like Stephenie's vampires, these people have choices and moral responsibilities.

Is there any moral justification for making a living by this kind of behavior? Shouldn't we learn to expect that the people who engage in papparazzi activities not only take legal responsibility for their actions (which will only go so far), but also moral responsibility? Morality does apply to the workplace. Doctors don't only treat emergency cases with insurance. Lawyers are expected to take pro bono cases. Teachers are expected to not discriminate against students. Journalists are expected to do their best to publish truth. Individually, celebrity stalkers cause distress ... as a group they cause psychological trauma, financial problems (bodyguards don't work for free), and sometimes physical harm, to the celebrity or others around them. To say that we don't expect any more than this from papparazzi - that they blithely hurt other humans because they are hoping to make an income - lets them off the hook too easily. They are people too. They were raised with approximately the same morality as the rest of us. Some of them must sometimes be disgusted by their "profession" - if they know that the public expects more from them, maybe they will expect more from themselves, and find another way to make a living.

I seem to have been ranting, but can't find anything else I want to delete :oops: The main thought that I wanted to add was, just to not let papparazzi off the hook. It's hard to find someone who you can really count on to do the right thing. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't expect that from everyone, including papparazzi. Pulling on that vampire comparison really hard - if the Cullens can resist a feeding frenzy ....
My FanFiction Page ~ Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
Image
Proud Halfway House Cousin Sister! - Team Alice Celebrity Chef - Seeing the future since 1901
User avatar
smitten_by_twilight
Hiding Lauren's Hair Dye
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Making cinnamon rolls with Edward

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby AleaHale » Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:56 pm

I think the Paparazzi, in some aspects, should mind their own business. :rant:

Paparazzi people need to be taken down a few notches. The only reason I believe we "check out" Paparazzi magazines is the natural human drive for curiosity. We want to find out anything interesting? We read magazines, newspapers, and watch the news.

I believe that we should take the Paparazzi down a few notches because now they are invading personal space (i.e shoving a camera and microphone rudely into a celebrities face, following them outside when they just want to be left alone...etc). Our drive for curiosity shouldn't go this far, really. If the celebrities wanted to tell us something, they would tell us directly and upfront, not getting stalked mercilessly and poked and prodded for information that they clearly don't want to share. :?

Yeah, there is the Bill of Rights citing the Freedom of the Press. But in this case, with the Paparazzi, it should be a whole different thing, because if you go back in time the Paparazzi weren't as... pushy, you might say. Throughout time they only got more and more aggressive, and they will keep doing that until someone gets hurt (oh wait, that already happens dozens of times a year...) :banghead: :rant:

Obviously its going to get to the point where people are KILLED because of the Paparazzi's selfishness for a pretty penny.

Off my rant, but that's all I got to say about the subject. :hello:
User avatar
AleaHale
Settled in Forks
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 5:12 pm

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby StellaBlueBella » Thu Apr 07, 2011 11:38 pm

Chernaudi wrote:Talk about disrespect: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... inson.html

The article was pretty dispectful towards Kristen, and omits facts and even the photo they used was edited. I'm tired of this "you're a girl dating the most sought-after guy in H'wood" crap. And you can bet that if/when he read this, that Rob wasn't too happy, either.

Talk about spin...


Sorry for coming in so late on this discussion... But honestly, in this picture Kristen looks like she is about to sneeze and the second one looks like she just sneezed... I can imagine looking at a pic like that of myself and thinking... Wait? What was I doing then? Because really, who remembers something as seemingly inconsequential as a sneeze until it is turned into make believe drama.

I haven't read through all the posts yet (wanted to make my sneeze comment before I forgot) but I was wondering if anyone thinks that British or European press is more critical of Kristen than here in the US? I know they are critical of her here too but this article seemed to indicate somewhat of a 'chip on the shoulder' attitude. It's like this slightly awkward American girl is not worthy of the Bristish golden boy. Just a thought...

Alrighty... Going back to finish reading the thread.
Image

      To comprehend a nectar Requires sorest need.
User avatar
StellaBlueBella
Teaching Eric Social Graces
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:37 pm
Location: In my head

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby smitten_by_twilight » Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:44 pm

:rant: RANT WARNING :rant:
I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here but this has been building for a couple months :evil:
I read the Elle article linked to from the blog earlier today and after a few hours I let myself realize how upset I am. I am APPALLED by the level of speculation that journalists and even fans publicly engage in regarding Rob's and Kristen's private lives, especially any (and let's face it, probably) sex life enjoyed by either or both. THIS IS NO ONE ELSE'S BUSINESS! I can't recall any celebrity being more clear about their desire for privacy - not Sean Penn and Madonna, not Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon, NOBODY! It's horrible to catch comments from a fan who may be having a thoughtless moment - it's dreadful when it is a deliberate online comment by a journalist who should know better, especially when minors may access it. I used to think Elle was a magazine that could be counted on to be intelligent and thoughtful - NO MORE. Would you do this to your friends? Would you want someone to do this to you?
I don't go to papz sites - I have twice (several months ago) watched pretty mild papz videos on YouTube and my stomach turned - I'm not seeking out every tidbit of Robsten info and linking to questionable places. THIS BEHAVIOR IS EVERYWHERE! :banghead:
I'm ready to start thinking constructively. Any ideas?
Thanks for providing a thread for this rant! :oops:
My FanFiction Page ~ Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
Image
Proud Halfway House Cousin Sister! - Team Alice Celebrity Chef - Seeing the future since 1901
User avatar
smitten_by_twilight
Hiding Lauren's Hair Dye
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Making cinnamon rolls with Edward

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Alphie » Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:20 pm

Peter Facinelli tells a story about how twisted the paparazzi can be. He says that he went to open a door and then after had an itch on his nose. The Pap ran the photos in opposite order and said, "PFach picks his nose and wipes it on the door" kind of a thing. He also tells how he and his wife try to never shout at the pap or tell them off because they would just run the angry photos as a fight between Peter and Genie.

99% of what's in gossip magazines is fake and may only have a glimmer of truth behind it. I think the blame for the focus on the paparazzi also needs to go to the general public for being so stupid that we will literally believe anything with a photo! Heck, in today's world if it's in an e-mail that says "THIS IS A FACT" people will believe it. So for me it's kind of a matter of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Which came first, overly aggressive paparazzi or people who are so obsessed with famous people that they will literally believe anything?
Image
User avatar
Alphie
Blame me for everything
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 7:41 am
Location: Tennessee

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Jeakat » Sun Apr 17, 2011 9:46 pm

I love these kind of chats! I've got a degree in journalism (good honest journalism is what I want to do, not mindless celebrity stuff, just to be clear!) I've had to study this quite a bit, so I'll put down both sides.

The UK (where I'm from), has a really interesting press history, and is now one of the most famous in the world for this type of hounding. The UK was actually one of the first, if not the first (sorry, can't remember the exact facts now) places to introduce a free press, mainly through plenty of underground streams first. At that time it was beyond vital (I'm sure everyone here knows why so I won't explain!) Still today, the need for the press to remain an open forum is paramount.

That being said, the press (the vast majority anyway) are now abusing this freedom in their pursuit of celebrities. But there are so many factors to consider. Gone are the days when an actor/actress/muscian etc literally just did their acting job and had a very small public presence. Even when they did appear in public they had a public persona, keeping their private lives firmly out of the equation. For whatever reason, most likely competition (either to studios and record labels, or the celebrity themselves), celebrities started opening up a bit more, inviting people to get to know them better as a person, not just their occupation, so that they could be more successful. I think we can all agree that what is happening now has gone way too far and has nothing to do with the celebrity choosing to put themselves out there. But one of the difficulties is, where do we draw the line? On the one hand, celebrities want to use the media to their own gain but are unhappy when the shoe is on the other foot. Obviously the paps/stalking/ruthless pursuing is way, way out of line. People have the right to walk down the street in peace, never mind taking the safety aspect into concern.

Then there's the way that the press industry operates. The paps, more often than not, are either freelance, or hired by a pap firm. Very few of the ruthless ones actually work directly for a publication. Each picture has a price tag, the rarer the picture, the higher the price. Paps end up finding themselves having to go the extreme lengths to get the best shot. Of course, if it were me (I wouldn't become a pap in the first place, but if I did) I would refuse certain things based on the grounds of my own morals. The system whereby publications come across their pictures has to change.

Then we have to consider what more legislation would bring us. I know the UK doesn't have any privacy laws. I'm not sure if the US is different, but I'm guessing not. For example, a story gets printed in at least one of the national newspapers which reports (correctly) that a politician has had numerous affairs. Now, the question is, is that in the public interest, or just what the public is interested in? It can be a bit of a grey area where politicians/officials are concerned. One the one hand, their career isn't about selling themselves, it's about selling what they can do for the country. However, the public want someone who's trust worthy, and even though his personal life is none of our business, if he can lie and deceive his own wife, then who's to say he isn't doing that in government? If a privacy law was introduced for celebrities then it probably wouldn't take a long time before others would want to take advantage of it. And again, where would you draw the line? Would the celebrity be able to approach any publication whenever they wanted, profitting from it, while at the same time, publications were banned from running their own stories independantly from the celebrities? That just wouldn't work. Not least because a hell of a lot of publications would go out of business (some quite rightly, *cough* National Enquirer *cough*).

So really, there's two viable options. One, reform the way paps are allowed to obtain their photos. Quite a lot of the measures that need to be put in place would be very hard to govern -- like limiting the number of paps who can follow someone (there'd just be endless arguements of "I was here first!") -- but it certain steps can be taken.

Two, we need to change. I'm not saying that all of us are celebrity crazy/desperate to get all the latest info, however, the western world as a whole is. If there wasn't a demand for these pictures then they wouldn't sell. Yes there are cases where publications give us what they think we want to see, but more often than most it's our own want for these types of stories/images that fuel the pap fire. If you take away the crucial element, demand, then the paps will have no alternative than to seek other employment. However, this would be extremely difficult. On a personal level it's beyond easy, just choose not to buy/read/look up any celebrity information other than from their official spokesperson. However, spreafding the message and really creating an impact is so much harder to achieve. Ironically, in the pursuit of a free press to maintain democracy and liberate ourselves we've managed to oppress ourselves at the same time. The system can't change without mass effort and yet getting that message across (in an age where the ways in which we communicate are endless) to as many people needed to make a change is almost impossible.
I wasn’t born a compassionless shrew. I used to be sort of nice, you know - Leah Clearwater, Breaking Dawn, p.316
Jeakat
Wandering Through Town
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:24 pm

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby smitten_by_twilight » Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:13 am

Alphie, Jeakat, and everyone else who tolerated reading my rant, thanks for your tolerance. I love coming here, most everyone is quite decent, and so many people are really smart and know what the heck they are talking about!

Jeakat, I really appreciate you saying that so clearly. I have been thinking along those lines for a couple of weeks, but you said it tons better than I could have.

I keep thinking about concrete things to do and coming up blank. It's like what they say (it was a Supreme Court Justice, I think) about porn v. art: I can't define it, but I know it when I see it! We have a free press because it is vitally important to the political process ... but since we can't adequately define who is an appropriate person of interest, everyone else is at risk of having their privacy violated. The best concrete thing I've come up with so far is that next time I'm directing my distress to the editor of the publication involved.
My FanFiction Page ~ Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
Image
Proud Halfway House Cousin Sister! - Team Alice Celebrity Chef - Seeing the future since 1901
User avatar
smitten_by_twilight
Hiding Lauren's Hair Dye
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Making cinnamon rolls with Edward

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Chernaudi » Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:58 pm

All I can say is that I wish I had a Ilyushin Il-10 Shturmovik parked in my front yard and I can point at it and tell the paps about it. And in case you don't know what an Il-10 is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-10

Seriously, I do wonder if the paps can walk on one's private property and not be liable for criminal or civil charges, especially if it's clear that no trespassing is allowed.
Audi, Twilight, Cher, Pink Floyd, symphonic/progressive rock, KStew, RP, Bio-Booster Armor Guyver-what's not to like

Team Renesmee, Team Bella, Team Edward.

Fan fic stories: http://www.fanfiction.net/u/2192109/
User avatar
Chernaudi
Acquiring a Taste for Mountain Lion
 
Posts: 2036
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:01 am
Location: Mansfield, OH, USA

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Jeakat » Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:00 pm

smitten_by_twilight wrote:Alphie, Jeakat, and everyone else who tolerated reading my rant, thanks for your tolerance. I love coming here, most everyone is quite decent, and so many people are really smart and know what the heck they are talking about!

Jeakat, I really appreciate you saying that so clearly. I have been thinking along those lines for a couple of weeks, but you said it tons better than I could have.

I keep thinking about concrete things to do and coming up blank. It's like what they say (it was a Supreme Court Justice, I think) about porn v. art: I can't define it, but I know it when I see it! We have a free press because it is vitally important to the political process ... but since we can't adequately define who is an appropriate person of interest, everyone else is at risk of having their privacy violated. The best concrete thing I've come up with so far is that next time I'm directing my distress to the editor of the publication involved.


You're more than welcome! I understand the sometimes overwhelming need to rant. It's surprisingly refreshing! :D

Chernaudi wrote:All I can say is that I wish I had a Ilyushin Il-10 Shturmovik parked in my front yard and I can point at it and tell the paps about it. And in case you don't know what an Il-10 is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-10

Seriously, I do wonder if the paps can walk on one's private property and not be liable for criminal or civil charges, especially if it's clear that no trespassing is allowed.


No they can't, but the difficult lies when they stand on public property and use super-zoom lens. In that case, I'm not sure if there are any laws against them photographing private property unless they've trespassed. In fact, that reminds me of a pretty interesting example of what I was aying before about the public interest vs what the public is interested in. In the '90's/early 2000 Sarah Ferguson (Duchess of York) was pictured on holiday. The paps used a super zoom lens to get the shots from quite a distance away and the News of the World printed the pictures, which showed some rather private moments of her. Then, just a few months ago, Sarah Ferguson was secretly filmed (by the same newspaper) taking money from people posing as businessmen, claiming that she could get them close to Prince Andrew (her-ex). I believe (though it's so bad that I don't actually know for sure!) Prince Andrew is a business ambassador. Exactly the same person, with exactly the same newspaper, but one story is just for idle gossip and scandal, the other revealed something that really should've had the spotlight put on it.
I wasn’t born a compassionless shrew. I used to be sort of nice, you know - Leah Clearwater, Breaking Dawn, p.316
Jeakat
Wandering Through Town
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:24 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Great Conversations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron