Paparazzi.... or just plain stalking?

[Slow Love™]

Scarlett Johansson believes that the Paparazzi are no different from stalkers.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/film/scar...143944054.html

But there are many that say that because these people are public figures, the press are entitled to follow their every move and photograph them.

What are people's opinions on this? Should laws be tightened to prevent this behaviour? And if so, would there be any negative consequences to this?

[cricket player]

Paparazzi is very very good period .................

[Hoggy31]

I wish they would just leave me alone

[cricket player]

Originally Posted by Hoggy31

I wish they would just leave me alone

A human with four legs 4 eyes and 4 arms of course would get attention from the media and also from the paparazzi

[andyc]

there's two positions to it, really.

many members of the press are simply doing their job. you do get the occasional weirdo taking his job too far, but generally they're pretty controlled.

then there's the right to privacy. certainly these people deserve to be left alone when they go to a restaurant or a beach or a hotel.

i find it ironic that most people who'll take offence to the paparazzi stalking our dear scarlett are the people that buy the gossip magazines buy the bulk, and it's them that fuel the photographers to begin with. mainly i just don't see why these people should be obsessed over anyway, all they're doing is their job. you don't get people walking up to your cubicle and asking for your autograph and telling you they loved the work you did on last month's audit.

[andyc]

Originally Posted by cricket player

A human with four legs 4 eyes and 4 arms of course would get attention from the media and also from the paparazzi

oh bob, do you ever stop with the hilarity?

[Hoggy31]

Originally Posted by cricket player

A human with four legs 4 eyes and 4 arms of course would get attention from the media and also from the paparazzi

Geez, I got ripped by Bob

[Mister Wright]

While people still buy magazines that promote photos of celebrities doing private things than there will always be papparazzi. Its as simple as supply and demand.

Personally, I think it is part of the job of being a celebrity. For the extra money, fame and the benefits from that there is the flip side of endless travel and lack of privacy.

[Jono]

I think the key issue involves the people that buy the magazines and watch shows like Entertainment Tonight and all other celebrity gossip crap in religious fashion. I think they are the ones who have issues.

What is so fascinating about some celebrity being seen on a beach, or in a restaurant living their normal lives?

Regarding the paparazzi, I don't really care. Obviously the celebrities aren't going to like it, but it initally contributes to their fame at first. I'm sure when they are starting off they enjoy seeing their pictures in magazines.

[andyc]

yeah, good point jono. if it weren't for the paprazzi, they wouldn't be earning however many million per movie they do.

[Dasa]

Originally Posted by Slow Love™

But there are many that say that because these people are public figures, the press are entitled to follow their every move and photograph them.

I'm inclined to agree with this view. As Jono said, many of the celebrities who complain about the paparazzi would not have their fame and fortune without them. They really shouldn't complain unless they're willing to give up their multi-million dollar movie contracts and fame. Having said that, the press can go a bit too far at times - but people'll do anything in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

[andyc]

i just don't get it... all these people do is get in front of a camera and say a few words, and suddenly everyone wants to know who they're shagging. i mean, who cares!?

[Craig]

If they don't like it how about they go get a real job and where you don't earn not even 0.1% of that they command for a movie.

[Smudge]

It's not stalking - and at the end of the day, it's what the public want.

Despite your average person putting up a moral facade, 60-70% of people like to see into other people's lives - particularly if it's the rich and famous.

But, if it happens to them, that's when they get high and mighty.

[Top_Cat]

Two things; in a profession where publicity makes you famous, it's a bit rich to complain when it gets annoying. A lot of actors who complain about the attention, secretly do things to bring it upon themselves. The downside to being rich, powerful and famous is that, like it or not, every sordid thing you get up to will be scrutinised. If you pushed them enough, most actors would admit that although the attention might get to them occasionally, when they're NOT all over the papers, they don't like it.

Two, I notice that other actors, who are WAY more respected, well-known, famous, etc. than her, never seem to get bothered by the paparazzi. When was the last time you heard about Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, Tom Hanks, etc. in the paparazzi? So why would they be left alone? Because they either don't get up to anything really newsworthy anymore or they're good at hiding it.

Two quotes I've heard from Marlon Brando and others; "There's only one thing worse than being talked about and that's not being talked about" and "When you talk to an actor, if you ain't talkin' about him, he ain't listenin'."