This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Royal Palace releases manipulated image
- Will I still get a graduation if I study online?
- The branches of law
- Loving a celebrity is the most embarassing thing I accidentally ever committed to
- Am I being stupid?
- How good is achieving 80% in a MEng Electronic Engineering degree ?
- Should I continue?
- VOTE NOW!!! Vote for Overall GYG Winner 2023/24 🏆
- GYG announcement: fun and exciting things happening across TSR!
- Pls help
- Why is there freedom of the press?
- what do you call cheating
- VOTE NOW for the November GYG Winners!! 🏆
- Nominate the Overall GYG Winner for 2023/24!!!
- Rate TSR's Chinese takeaway order, 2024 edition!
- Christmas Countdown 2024
- Nominate January's GYG Winner - Chance to WIN Voucher or Rep points
- I got a MMP in my BTECs, what grades did you get?
- VOTE NOW - For the Dec GYG Winner!!!
- I'm not looking forward to my graduation ceremony anymore
Celebrities: Do they deserve rights to privacy?
Celebrities are always complaining about the paparazzi invading their space and putting their lives all over tabloids. With what happened to Diana maybe the paparazzi and our celebrity obsessioni has been taken too far.
However I never really feel sorry for them cause it's because of their fame that they earn millions and the media practically gave people like Paris Hilton or Kerry Katona careers. They need the media and attention on their private lives to promote their movie or album or fashion line. They chose a life in the spotlight, so why complain?
So should celebrities have increased rights to privary? Do they deserve it?
However I never really feel sorry for them cause it's because of their fame that they earn millions and the media practically gave people like Paris Hilton or Kerry Katona careers. They need the media and attention on their private lives to promote their movie or album or fashion line. They chose a life in the spotlight, so why complain?
So should celebrities have increased rights to privary? Do they deserve it?
Scroll to see replies
chrissy909
Celebrities are always complaining about the paparazzi invading their space and putting their lives all over tabloids. With what happened to Diana maybe the paparazzi and our celebrity obsessioni has been taken too far.
However I never really feel sorry for them cause it's because of their fame that they earn millions and the media practically gave people like Paris Hilton or Kerry Katona careers. They need the media and attention on their private lives to promote their movie or album or fashion line. They chose a life in the spotlight, so why complain?
So should celebrities have increased rights to privary? Do they deserve it?
However I never really feel sorry for them cause it's because of their fame that they earn millions and the media practically gave people like Paris Hilton or Kerry Katona careers. They need the media and attention on their private lives to promote their movie or album or fashion line. They chose a life in the spotlight, so why complain?
So should celebrities have increased rights to privary? Do they deserve it?
I think they have a right to be treated with decency. As celebrities, they can rightly expect to have everything concerning their careers as celebrities spurged accross the front page but I don't think open season should be declared on their personal lives and washing their dirty laundry in public.
But I do think many of them invite this sort of attention. Lots of "stars" manage to lead fairly private and anonymous lives (Harrison Ford for example) whereas others seem to do everything possible to attract the attention of the media (Tom Cruise for example)
Howard
I think they have a right to be treated with decency. As celebrities, they can rightly expect to have everything concerning their careers as celebrities spurged accross the front page but I don't think open season should be declared on their personal lives and washing their dirty laundry in public.
But I do think many of them invite this sort of attention. Lots of "stars" manage to lead fairly private and anonymous lives (Harrison Ford for example) whereas others seem to do everything possible to attract the attention of the media (Tom Cruise for example)
But I do think many of them invite this sort of attention. Lots of "stars" manage to lead fairly private and anonymous lives (Harrison Ford for example) whereas others seem to do everything possible to attract the attention of the media (Tom Cruise for example)
I agree. Just because someone is in the public eye as part of their career does not automatically mean that their private life is up for grabs as well (unless, of course, they choose to invite the media in).
What I find interesting is that it is usually the media who get blamed for all this invasion of privacy - but if people didn't buy celebrity-obsessed magazines, there would be no reason to publish celebrity information in the first place. It's all a matter of supply and demand, although in this case perhaps supply creates demand as well as the other way round...
Everyone has a right to privacy, including therefore celebrities.
What springs to mind in a debate like this is a recent example involving Sienna Miller. She was quoted as saying to a journalist at the premiere of her film, Casanova, that she thinks there should be stricter laws on prosecuting the paparazzi in the UK because they can be intimidating and dangerous.
She was heavily criticised for saying this whilst wearing a designer dress, caked in make-up and smiling for tons of photographers at the premiere.
But that's the point; she was at a premiere. It is part of her job as an actress to promote her films, but it is not part of her job as an actress to promote herself, I don't think. After all, her profession revolves around her pretending to be other people.
So whilst photographers have every right to clamber over her at publicity events such as premieres, interviews, photo calls etc., following her around London is unacceptable.
Of course, some celebrities court publicity like this. Paris Hilton for one, as people have mentioned, seems to love it; she's even been pictured buying magazines featuring herself. But these types of people will always go out of their way to gain publicity and exposure - thus there is no need for the others to be hounded if they do not wish to be.
I think it is unfair especially as media attention can result in break-ups/fall outs and life changing circumstance. And it is not exactly tasteful of the public to pour over such things.
A recent advert of a celeb magazine actually defies belief. I think it was a TV advert for Now magzine and the actual voice over is: "Kerry Katona close to bankruptcy....read all about in Now!" I mean, really!! I couldn't believe it! It just encapsulates how ****ed up it all is!
So, yeah, of course celebrities have a right to privacy. But yes, I do think it is hypocritical of people like Tom Cruise, say, who jumps on sofas and declares everything about his private domain and then criticises people for being obsessed or asking intrusive questions. It's very hypocritical and celebrities can't have it both ways only when they want it.
And there was the recent case with Reese Witherspoon when a photographer followed her, her child, and her child's friends to Disneyland and by accident smacked one of them over the head with a camera; and the whole Lyndsay Lohan car crash thing...
So there should be stricter laws. I don't hate the paparazzi at all. A lot of people blame the photographers themselves, but it is not their fault. They are just doing a job, and I'm sure paparazzo pays a lot better than other types of photography. But the fact of the matter is they would not take the pictures if there wasn't a demand for them so perhaps the answer lies in a crackdown on the media exposure etc, but then again Heat etc wouldn't sell if people didn't want to buy.
It's a tough one definitely, but it is intrusive and unfair and you can tell the harm it does in certain examples: ie. Sienna Miller and Jude Law broken engagement/Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston marriage break-up/Pete Doherty's drug addiction and court hearing etc.
But I think people like Michael Jackson wearing traditional religious women's robes to cover themselves up and stuff is just attracting even greater attention.
Like Keira Knightley who recently left her 21st birthday party wearing a pig mask. (Which can only be described as slightly strange and worrying).
What springs to mind in a debate like this is a recent example involving Sienna Miller. She was quoted as saying to a journalist at the premiere of her film, Casanova, that she thinks there should be stricter laws on prosecuting the paparazzi in the UK because they can be intimidating and dangerous.
She was heavily criticised for saying this whilst wearing a designer dress, caked in make-up and smiling for tons of photographers at the premiere.
But that's the point; she was at a premiere. It is part of her job as an actress to promote her films, but it is not part of her job as an actress to promote herself, I don't think. After all, her profession revolves around her pretending to be other people.
So whilst photographers have every right to clamber over her at publicity events such as premieres, interviews, photo calls etc., following her around London is unacceptable.
Of course, some celebrities court publicity like this. Paris Hilton for one, as people have mentioned, seems to love it; she's even been pictured buying magazines featuring herself. But these types of people will always go out of their way to gain publicity and exposure - thus there is no need for the others to be hounded if they do not wish to be.
I think it is unfair especially as media attention can result in break-ups/fall outs and life changing circumstance. And it is not exactly tasteful of the public to pour over such things.
A recent advert of a celeb magazine actually defies belief. I think it was a TV advert for Now magzine and the actual voice over is: "Kerry Katona close to bankruptcy....read all about in Now!" I mean, really!! I couldn't believe it! It just encapsulates how ****ed up it all is!
So, yeah, of course celebrities have a right to privacy. But yes, I do think it is hypocritical of people like Tom Cruise, say, who jumps on sofas and declares everything about his private domain and then criticises people for being obsessed or asking intrusive questions. It's very hypocritical and celebrities can't have it both ways only when they want it.
And there was the recent case with Reese Witherspoon when a photographer followed her, her child, and her child's friends to Disneyland and by accident smacked one of them over the head with a camera; and the whole Lyndsay Lohan car crash thing...
So there should be stricter laws. I don't hate the paparazzi at all. A lot of people blame the photographers themselves, but it is not their fault. They are just doing a job, and I'm sure paparazzo pays a lot better than other types of photography. But the fact of the matter is they would not take the pictures if there wasn't a demand for them so perhaps the answer lies in a crackdown on the media exposure etc, but then again Heat etc wouldn't sell if people didn't want to buy.
It's a tough one definitely, but it is intrusive and unfair and you can tell the harm it does in certain examples: ie. Sienna Miller and Jude Law broken engagement/Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston marriage break-up/Pete Doherty's drug addiction and court hearing etc.
But I think people like Michael Jackson wearing traditional religious women's robes to cover themselves up and stuff is just attracting even greater attention.
Like Keira Knightley who recently left her 21st birthday party wearing a pig mask. (Which can only be described as slightly strange and worrying).
Howard
I think they have a right to be treated with decency. As celebrities, they can rightly expect to have everything concerning their careers as celebrities spurged accross the front page but I don't think open season should be declared on their personal lives and washing their dirty laundry in public.
But I do think many of them invite this sort of attention. Lots of "stars" manage to lead fairly private and anonymous lives (Harrison Ford for example) whereas others seem to do everything possible to attract the attention of the media (Tom Cruise for example)
But I do think many of them invite this sort of attention. Lots of "stars" manage to lead fairly private and anonymous lives (Harrison Ford for example) whereas others seem to do everything possible to attract the attention of the media (Tom Cruise for example)
Spot on.
Faith Hill and Tim McGraw is an example of a celebrity couple that do a good job at keeping the paparazzi away, and leading great personal and family lives.
Yeah but Faith Hill and Tim McGraw hardly do that themselves, do they? I don't think they've attracted enough attention to be deemed "good" at keeping it away. They were never particularly 'interesting' or 'high profile'. I would actually cite Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie as doing a "good job" at keeping their lives private - the media is obsessed with that couple and yet the photos people get of them are mainly grainy and far off because they keep themselves to themselves and spend most of their time in British pubs in the countryside or in random countries doing charity work where no-one can hound them. And they are the most high profile couple in the world, without doubt really. So I'd say they do the best job. They haven't do any: welcome to our home spreads or anything like that.
Depends on the celebrity. If they're the type to pour out all the personal details to a magazine then they've opened up the floodgates (it's like inviting a vampire into your house). If you've invited OK! to your wedding then you should expect them to be there when the divorce comes through, quite simply. However, if you've the sort of celebrity that does not court media attention then you should be entitled to a private life.
Personally I feel sorry for the people that buy all the magazines. How sad must your life be if you're genuinely interested in Kerry Katona's latest man or what Paris Hilton wore when she went shopping.
Personally I feel sorry for the people that buy all the magazines. How sad must your life be if you're genuinely interested in Kerry Katona's latest man or what Paris Hilton wore when she went shopping.
Knogle
Spot on.
Faith Hill and Tim McGraw is an example of a celebrity couple that do a good job at keeping the paparazzi away, and leading great personal and family lives.
Faith Hill and Tim McGraw is an example of a celebrity couple that do a good job at keeping the paparazzi away, and leading great personal and family lives.
I don't know of Tim Mcgraw. And Faith Hill is harldy Mariah Carey, is she? That could just be because people aren't as interested in those people. The bigger a star you are, the more the papers want you. Faith Hill is too normal, and therefore boring. Mariah Carey is a crazy woman, who makes interesting viewing.
All celebs deserve privacy. When they are working, they'll be rightly in the public eye if they want to be. When theyre at home in their PJ's, they should be left alone.
zhivago
spend most of their time in British pubs in the countryside .
Really??
I agree with Howards. Most celebs with privacy problems bring it on themselves.
I think celebrities should have the same rights to privacy as anyone else. However, if you live by the sword you die by the sword. There are celebrities who will phone up the paparazzi whenever they need some decent publicity. The paparazzi make money selling the photos and the celebrity gets in the newspaper. I think some celebrities also use there own photographers so they own the rights to the photographs. So basically, some celebrities deserve what they get. Many celebrities don't court the media and in return they are less likely to be hounded when things go ***s up.
naivesincerity
Really??
I don't know whether that is a piss take considering the nature of the thread,
, but yes. Angelina Jolie owns a mansion in Buckinghamshire which is apparently her full-time residency. ie. she now "lives" in England with Brad Pitt and the two kids and loads of local pubs have been quoted (mostly in the Daily Mail) about how they love their pub lunches etc etc. But considering it seems they spend nigh 90% of their time galavanting across the globe, she probably "lives" there for about a couple of months a year!Perfect example of obtrusive invasion of privacy (but also a perfect example of Buckinghamshire estate!):
http://johnmurdoch.free.fr/images/public/buckinghamshire04.jpg
Yes, check out European Human Rights:
"ARTICLE 8
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. "
"ARTICLE 8
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. "
zhivago
I don't know whether that is a piss take considering the nature of the thread, , but yes. Angelina Jolie owns a mansion in Buckinghamshire which is apparently her full-time residency. ie. she now "lives" in England with Brad Pitt and the two kids and loads of local pubs have been quoted (mostly in the Daily Mail) about how they love their pub lunches etc etc. But considering it seems they spend nigh 90% of their time galavanting across the globe, she probably "lives" there for about a couple of months a year!
Perfect example of obtrusive invasion of privacy (but also a perfect example of Buckinghamshire estate!):
http://johnmurdoch.free.fr/images/public/buckinghamshire04.jpg
, but yes. Angelina Jolie owns a mansion in Buckinghamshire which is apparently her full-time residency. ie. she now "lives" in England with Brad Pitt and the two kids and loads of local pubs have been quoted (mostly in the Daily Mail) about how they love their pub lunches etc etc. But considering it seems they spend nigh 90% of their time galavanting across the globe, she probably "lives" there for about a couple of months a year!Perfect example of obtrusive invasion of privacy (but also a perfect example of Buckinghamshire estate!):
http://johnmurdoch.free.fr/images/public/buckinghamshire04.jpg
Yeah, I know someone who works in a pub in Bucks and has often seen Brad and Angelina.
Of course celebrities deserve the right to privacy just like other people. They are human after all and privacy is a right each and every person is entitled to. Personally I don't see why the newpapers and magazines are obsessed of taking pictures of them when on holiday etc, it is alright when its the 'red carpet' and at organised events but they should be left alone. Their personal life is their personal life and no one could interfere with that regardless to what their status is.
Define the terms. Celebrity - somebody that seeks exposure to constantly maintain their position in the media and public eye? Or are fame and celebrity synonymous? I'd say that they are two separate concepts.
Personally, I've no respect for celebrities. I consider celebrities to be people like Chantelle and Paris Hilton; neither has any skills yet the masses are fascinated by their lives. I'd go into how everything is a big sphere of pointless information, which ultimately serves to promulgate some sort of a fantasy reality that keeps everybody quiet and happy, but this isn't the time or place.
Famous people, like Bill Gates or Gary Oldman, well to be honest they don't really place themselves in a position that warrants constant harassment. Obviously the odd interview to promote a film or a new innovation for example, may result in extra attention but I doubt many people notice.
Ultimately celebrities bring it on themselves, thus invalidating their claim to privacy.
Personally, I've no respect for celebrities. I consider celebrities to be people like Chantelle and Paris Hilton; neither has any skills yet the masses are fascinated by their lives. I'd go into how everything is a big sphere of pointless information, which ultimately serves to promulgate some sort of a fantasy reality that keeps everybody quiet and happy, but this isn't the time or place.
Famous people, like Bill Gates or Gary Oldman, well to be honest they don't really place themselves in a position that warrants constant harassment. Obviously the odd interview to promote a film or a new innovation for example, may result in extra attention but I doubt many people notice.
Ultimately celebrities bring it on themselves, thus invalidating their claim to privacy.
Related discussions
- Royal Palace releases manipulated image
- Will I still get a graduation if I study online?
- The branches of law
- Loving a celebrity is the most embarassing thing I accidentally ever committed to
- Am I being stupid?
- How good is achieving 80% in a MEng Electronic Engineering degree ?
- Should I continue?
- VOTE NOW!!! Vote for Overall GYG Winner 2023/24 🏆
- GYG announcement: fun and exciting things happening across TSR!
- Pls help
- Why is there freedom of the press?
- what do you call cheating
- VOTE NOW for the November GYG Winners!! 🏆
- Nominate the Overall GYG Winner for 2023/24!!!
- Rate TSR's Chinese takeaway order, 2024 edition!
- Christmas Countdown 2024
- Nominate January's GYG Winner - Chance to WIN Voucher or Rep points
- I got a MMP in my BTECs, what grades did you get?
- VOTE NOW - For the Dec GYG Winner!!!
- I'm not looking forward to my graduation ceremony anymore
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 month ago
It has been two years since I graduated and I don't know what to do
