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 Tornado » Wed Jul 20, 2011 5:09 pm

Chernaudi wrote:
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.


I couldn't agree more. Although I must confess I prefer the "they deserve it" attitude to the one where the person says, "Oh, I wish those horrible paps would leave Rob and Kristen alone!" and then go on to talk about the great new photos they saw in which Rob and Kristen were "obviously" kissing! That attitude just makes me crazy. Yeah sure, they want the paps to leave them alone, but they still want to see those intrusive pictures! I mean, they have a right to know, don't they? Rob and Kristen are their best buds! Of course they are! They saw them make out on the movie screen, so of course they know them and are entitled to know everything about them! But they wish those photographers would leave them alone - after they've got the photos of them at that after party, anyway ...

I think it's time the governments of places like California start acknowledging that the laws against stalking apply to paps and that they MUST be enforced. However, I don't think we're going to see the end of it anytime soon, and probably not until someone else loses their life. Probably an innocent bystander. And even then it will probably only change if the family sues the pap and wins and the others see that this kind of thing might actually hurt them in the hip pocket. That's the only language they understand.
Image
Tornado
Drag Racing With Alice and Edward
 
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: The Land Down Under

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Chernaudi » Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:19 pm

Easy for the media people to ignore how amoral their actions are when they use money to lull themselves to sleep, isn't it?

As long as enough people remain comfortably numb to their antics, they'll continue doing it until the government cracks down on them, or they start losing money as more people learn what's going on.
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/
Chernaudi
Red-Eyed Vampire
 
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:01 am
Location: Mansfield, OH, USA

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby smitten_by_twilight » Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:03 am

I had a thought :idea: . It happens occasionally. On the slim chance that it has some degree of novelty, I thought I'd post it here.

I was thinking about cyberbullying - I was reading an old magazine article on that string of teen suicides a few months ago that appeared to be provoked by homosexual cyberbullying. I'm really concerned about this as my son is going into junior high, is a sensitive boy, and as both he and I, really, are not so technologically sophisticated. And it struck me - when kids cyberbully each other by maliciously gossiping in cyberspace, often with sexual comments, it's a awful lot like what tabloids do. We've talked on this thread about how the media put pix out of order to give a misleading impression, misquote, make up quotes and information, etc, etc. This is just like teen cyberbullying. Kids lie and make up information - with malicious, rather than purely monetary, intent.

I'm so stuck on the insight (well, it seems like insight to me anyway) that I'm having trouble developing this further. But how can we expect our kids to stop cyberbullying when they have such a constant adult model for it?
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 » Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:58 pm

That is what they do, except they use print and TV to get their point across, but the KS comment crap that prompted this thread was caused by people choosing to believe what an online tabloid gossiper posted on her site.

And the internet is fill with this crap too. Really no different than cyberbullying, and I have another name for this type of trash, but it's not really appropriate for this forum...
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/
Chernaudi
Red-Eyed Vampire
 
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:01 am
Location: Mansfield, OH, USA

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Tornado » Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:52 am

Yes, it's all tarred with the same brush, it's just that journalists and photographers get paid to do it!
Image
Tornado
Drag Racing With Alice and Edward
 
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: The Land Down Under

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby MysticsOcean » Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:47 pm

What a great topic to discuss, and one I find very interesting.

I never really thought about the paparazzi until I started to become part of the Twilight universe. I was interested in all the actors, and when doing some scouting online and youtube to find out who they were I was shocked by what they go through everyday. I do not agree with the common belief that as actors they are somehow inviting the harassment, and therefore it is impossible to protect their rights. However, that is my opinion and many different people believe differently.

It is important to look at the line that the paparazzi crosses. If you look at things from a legal and Constitutional stand point what the paparazzi's rights are protected by the Constitution. The 1st Amendment strictly enforces a freedom of the press. However, privacy is not protected under the Constitution. This is not definitive as many people use different Amendments to support their belief that privacy is expressed in the Constitution. However, nowhere does it explicitly state that people have the right to privacy in this country. The paparazzi is protected by freedom of the press.

Things get tricky when people consider rather or not what the paparazzi does is harassment. I think most people can agree that it is harassment, and they would be blind not to. I know that Rob had a run in with the paparazzi because they would not stop following him, and he was desperate for them not to find out where he lived/staying. He approached the cops, and they were unable to do anything. I think it is clear harassment, and everyone is protected from it with state laws. The Constitution is a federal law though, and that trumps every other law in place. Therefore, actors rights in regard to privacy are trumped by the Paparazi's right for freedom of the press.

What I believe needs to be discussed is what needs to be done to make sure this is not a reality. Most people have already said it on here. It starts with the demand. The more people demand the magazine articles, social networking pictures, youtube videos, and shows like TMZ. Lots of shows on E! are very guilty of reporting things from paparazzi sources, and rather or not Perez Hilton wants to admit it - he is a pap. I fear it will be impossible to get the demand down until the Twilight saga's popularity has died down. Even then, they will still get the occasional picture by the paps. It is hard to convince people who put their heart and soul into Twilight. As a huge fan of Kristen Stewart I even find myself looking at the occasionally paparazzi video just enticed by who they are. I have done my best to not look at those videos that involve unwanted pictures.

It is unfortunate because the three of them have to deal with this, especially because they deal with it so well. Everyone is right that Kristen gets the worst end of the deal. I am not sure it is because she is a female, or there is any gender biased in the media, I know the paparazzi would love to dig into Robert Pattinson - they would think of the sales. I think it is because Kristen has a different personality than most people. She is much more brisk, and straight forward. Most girls are more gossipy and like to put on wide smiles. Kristen is not like that. I thinks he is the smartest and most mature of all of them in the series, but other people do not see it that way. She was unaware of how to deal with fame, and put on the happy face like all the others do. She was an easy target because she is openly awkward during interviews

It is a shame that the three have to deal with this. I think they would be a lot more open about their lives, things like: music, family, friends, favorites, etc. However, they feel like they have to protect themselves, and have to worry about what others think. Unfortunately, if anything does not change regarding higher federal laws, this is what they will have to endure for a few more years - possibly even their lifetime. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are a high profile couple who can not even leave their home. The paparazzi are out of control.
Image
User avatar
MysticsOcean
Settled in Forks
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Chernaudi » Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:26 am

MysticsOcean wrote:What a great topic to discuss, and one I find very interesting.

I never really thought about the paparazzi until I started to become part of the Twilight universe. I was interested in all the actors, and when doing some scouting online and youtube to find out who they were I was shocked by what they go through everyday. I do not agree with the common belief that as actors they are somehow inviting the harassment, and therefore it is impossible to protect their rights. However, that is my opinion and many different people believe differently.

It is important to look at the line that the paparazzi crosses. If you look at things from a legal and Constitutional stand point what the paparazzi's rights are protected by the Constitution. The 1st Amendment strictly enforces a freedom of the press. However, privacy is not protected under the Constitution. This is not definitive as many people use different Amendments to support their belief that privacy is expressed in the Constitution. However, nowhere does it explicitly state that people have the right to privacy in this country. The paparazzi is protected by freedom of the press.

Things get tricky when people consider rather or not what the paparazzi does is harassment. I think most people can agree that it is harassment, and they would be blind not to. I know that Rob had a run in with the paparazzi because they would not stop following him, and he was desperate for them not to find out where he lived/staying. He approached the cops, and they were unable to do anything. I think it is clear harassment, and everyone is protected from it with state laws. The Constitution is a federal law though, and that trumps every other law in place. Therefore, actors rights in regard to privacy are trumped by the Paparazi's right for freedom of the press.

What I believe needs to be discussed is what needs to be done to make sure this is not a reality. Most people have already said it on here. It starts with the demand. The more people demand the magazine articles, social networking pictures, youtube videos, and shows like TMZ. Lots of shows on E! are very guilty of reporting things from paparazzi sources, and rather or not Perez Hilton wants to admit it - he is a pap. I fear it will be impossible to get the demand down until the Twilight saga's popularity has died down. Even then, they will still get the occasional picture by the paps. It is hard to convince people who put their heart and soul into Twilight. As a huge fan of Kristen Stewart I even find myself looking at the occasionally paparazzi video just enticed by who they are. I have done my best to not look at those videos that involve unwanted pictures.

It is unfortunate because the three of them have to deal with this, especially because they deal with it so well. Everyone is right that Kristen gets the worst end of the deal. I am not sure it is because she is a female, or there is any gender biased in the media, I know the paparazzi would love to dig into Robert Pattinson - they would think of the sales. I think it is because Kristen has a different personality than most people. She is much more brisk, and straight forward. Most girls are more gossipy and like to put on wide smiles. Kristen is not like that. I thinks he is the smartest and most mature of all of them in the series, but other people do not see it that way. She was unaware of how to deal with fame, and put on the happy face like all the others do. She was an easy target because she is openly awkward during interviews

It is a shame that the three have to deal with this. I think they would be a lot more open about their lives, things like: music, family, friends, favorites, etc. However, they feel like they have to protect themselves, and have to worry about what others think. Unfortunately, if anything does not change regarding higher federal laws, this is what they will have to endure for a few more years - possibly even their lifetime. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are a high profile couple who can not even leave their home. The paparazzi are out of control.


And this is why I'd love for the paps to get caught on an Army or Navy or USAF base--they'd be on US Government property, and the signs usually say "NO TRESPASSING" or "NO UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL", followed by the admonishment of "Use of deadly force is/may be authorized", or "Trespassers may be shot". I know that may sound cruel and such, but I'd just love to have some soldiers or sailors pound the crap out of these guys and lock them up.

And I think that their mentality reflects badly upon them as pests, parasites, and people with no scruples and no limits in their amoral pursuit of money. And I do know that they are putting others in danger, and maybe that they're doing the same, because they know that they PO these people's fans, and that if they get too rough, they might incite a riot, because most of the world hate these people for what they do and for who a lot of them are.

But then again, the anti-pap laws are like firearms laws in the US--there in reality is very little Federal regulation, just the National Firearms Act, which says that you have to pay a $200 tax to own an automatic weapon, short barreled rifle or shotgun, and $100 for a sound suppressor. Basically, unless you're a convicted violent felon, or are deemed to be excessively emotionally or mentally unstable, or deemed to be "criminally insane", there's nothing that the Feds can legally do to prevent an average citizen from buying a gun as long as he passes a background check. That's where the states come in, and 99% percent of firearms regs are state and local laws. There's nothing in the Second Amendment that explicitly states that at the Federal level that firearms ownership is a god-given right, but it does say that the US Government cannot impede firearms ownership except in the limited circumstances I've given.

Same goes with the paps--there's no real Federal law on the books to prevent what the paps do, and, like gun regs, they leave that mostly up to the State and Local governments.

The way I see it, there's only two ways to stop the paps and such, one being for the feds to enact laws and restrictions, and for the states and local govs to take matters into their own hands and restrict their activities, and arrest some of these people and make it easier to sue them like in the UK where some people have won lawsuits and injunctions and restraining orders against them, or to cut off their money supply, which the governments can do, too--if they can do it to terrorist, they can do it to these cretins--or the public has to wake up and realize what's going on.

I'm a huge Kristen Stewart fan and I feel the way that the advocacy groups reacted to her comments about a year ago was a huge, embarrassing showing of stupidity and ignorance and shows how much some people have let the media dumb them down, and, of course, most pressure groups can't resist getting their names in the paper as opportunist--like the paps are--instead of doing honest work for their cause.

As long as there are stupid, jealous, ignorant people out there who are willing to part with cash for what I consider only to be suited as toilet paper, this will continue unabated.

And of course, being a history buff, I feel that freedom isn't free, and it shouldn't be abused like this--mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, family, friends, and above all else, people have died for such freedoms, and they need not to be trudged on by morons out to make a quick buck.
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/
Chernaudi
Red-Eyed Vampire
 
Posts: 1898
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:01 am
Location: Mansfield, OH, USA

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Tornado » Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:10 pm

Your constitution would allow, I assume, for the basic principle that all citizens should feel safe, shouldn't it? I'm sure that the celebrities don't feel safe when they are being pursued down a freeway by paps on all sides. One should balance out the other. It's not a question of freedom of the press in those instances, but of the abuse of that privilege.
Image
Tornado
Drag Racing With Alice and Edward
 
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: The Land Down Under

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby MysticsOcean » Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:05 pm

And of course, being a history buff, I feel that freedom isn't free, and it shouldn't be abused like this--mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, family, friends, and above all else, people have died for such freedoms, and they need not to be trudged on by morons out to make a quick buck.


I love the fact that you are a history buff, I have my Bachelors Degree in History. You make a very important point. The Constitution was set to guarantee the rights of the people, because at the time people were slaughtered for reporting to the media they had back then (papers, and slow flowing press). If the monarchy did not like what the people were reporting, they were jailed and often times killed. However, those rights were granted at a very different time. It is interesting that the founding fathers believed so strongly in private property, but did not specifically state anything about privacy in the Constitution. It is important to recognize that the founding fathers never would have expected the level of media we have today, and therefore, for the sake of everyone maybe a privacy clause should be added. It is extremely difficult to make any changes to the Constitution, should we make it easier? I am not sure of the perfect answer, just throwing out some ideas. It is not just celebrities that are effected by the media - but if anyone is thrust into anything sensationalized the paparazzi has every right to report it. Think about Elizabeth Smart, who was kidnapped. Her family was completely hounded by the paparazzi the entire time. There are no federal laws in place that guarantee people protection from things like this.

The way I see it, there's only two ways to stop the paps and such, one being for the feds to enact laws and restrictions, and for the states and local govs to take matters into their own hands and restrict their activities


I think that is a great idea. A federal law would be best, because it would grant more freedoms at a higher level. However, the latter would be great as well. I know that different states treat this differently. When Rob was on Ellen he talked about his road trip, where he passed through Texas. He ended up in Lubbock, which is where the University Texas Tech is located. It was not long before people found out he was there, and there was soon a frenzy at the restaurant he was at. People were lined up to get in outside, and the police officers there offered Rob and his friends a ride for protection. However, when he begged the cops to help him in LA so he could go home, they did nothing. I am from Texas, and we value private property laws. It is nearly impossible for anyone to step on your private property if you do not want them to. I could be wrong, but there might be some true to a value on private property, and the ability to have more privacy.

I loved reading your response Chernaudi - very intellectual and a great conversation.


Your constitution would allow, I assume, for the basic principle that all citizens should feel safe, shouldn't it? I'm sure that the celebrities don't feel safe when they are being pursued down a freeway by paps on all sides. One should balance out the other. It's not a question of freedom of the press in those instances, but of the abuse of that privilege.


Well, it is true that the Constitution allows for three basic inherent principles. The right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (originally Private Property). Some could make the argument that not feeling safe is no right to life, but those are the only firm inherent rights in American society - since our Constitution leaves much room for interpretation (many may disagree with me on this, as some believe in a strict interpretation - I am just stating my opinion). Furthermore, Rob and Kristen would have to prove to a judge or jury that they were not safe. That is where it becomes extremely tricky. They would have to prove that the paparazzi meant them harm. That becomes extremely difficult to do. It is nearly impossible to charge somebody because you felt unsafe, you have to prove they were a danger to you. I agree with you that the paparazzi are abusing their privilege. It is the worst kind of people who take a wonderful right granted to them, and turn it into something that causes another party to feel less free.

I would argue that the paparazzi are infringing upon Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson's right to freedom. Most people do not see it this way. In America, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution. If the two are unable to prove endangerment, no one would even give it a second thought.

Watching Rob and Kristen go through this, makes me wonder if this is why Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears went off the deep end.
Image
User avatar
MysticsOcean
Settled in Forks
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: The Paparazzi and the Press

Postby Tornado » Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:34 am

I should think what happened to the Princess of Wales would be something they could point to. It's clear that pursuing people around in cars like that is very dangerous and can result in death.
Image
Tornado
Drag Racing With Alice and Edward
 
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: The Land Down Under

PreviousNext

Return to Great Conversations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest