Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #candidcamera more →
Paparazzi Desperate For Photos Of First Daughters
| posts about #candidcamera more → |
Paparazzi Desperate For Photos Of First Daughters |
01/29/09
01/29/09
::shudder::
01/29/09
I really, really, really, really, really hope I'm there the first time the Secret Service bodychecks those creeps. Comeuppance!
01/29/09
These girls haven't even hit puberty. Neither has run for office. Their lives for the next four years are going to be wierd enough without some creepy OK photographer stalking their pyjama parties!!!
01/29/09
01/29/09
(I'm probably dating myself by admitting that I remember the coverage of Amy vividly. She was the butt of many jokes and it was quite sad.)
01/29/09
01/29/09
I honestly don't want to see pictures of them. Yes, they are adorable, but they're children. They didn't choose the limelight. It's really unsettling to see unscripted paparazzi shots of them because it's kind of stalkery and they're kids.
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
Seriously, you've blown my mind. Thanks.
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
I'm primarily talking about the children, though - it's wrong to have to subject your children to the paps, and the scrutiny of mullions of strangers.
I mean, to be honest, I am interested in some celebs - because, you know, they are people and people are interesting, so I'm not putting myself above all this. But someone made the point upthread that just because you crave something doesn't mean it's good for you.
Let alone the fact that I just don't want to be part of a machine that harasses people because of some fucked-up value system that decrees because these people are regarded as beautiful and have made a lot of money out of their appearance (b/c, let's face it, it's the rare actor/musician who gets there on talent alone) that they therefore have NO RIGHT to a private life. It's a weird kind of jealousy/punishment way of looking at life and I just don't subscribe to it. I'm not saying you do, I'm just trying to explain my viewpoint ;)
01/29/09
Yes I can. I honestly would rather they were left alone when going about their daily life. There will be plenty of official dos and whatnot to get photos. But then I feel that way about all celebs. I am a freak, obviously.
01/29/09
Just out of curiosity, how much do you know about the photo agencies you use and what their policies might be for photographers. Do they try and regulate the way the photographers behave? Only use "ethical" paparazzi? Or do they let them speed after Britney, the wrong way down a road while she's having a nervous breakdown? There are more and more ugly episodes coming to light about what happens when these photos are taken.
I recently read a piece in the Guardian which made me want to boycott every site that uses paparazzis shots. Even simple street shots. This is a quote from it:
"Whenever I [Miranda Sawyer] do research for an interview, I look up my interviewee on YouTube, to see how they talk. What I've found is that if that celebrity is out and about, it's not them who are doing the chatting. It's the paps. Those boys will say anything to get a good picture, a juicy action shot. Bitch, slut, slag are some of the printable epithets. There's much worse. Examples? Kate Beckinsale, walking with her nine-year-old daughter from shop to car. One pap says something so filthily misogynistic to her that I'm not going to write it down. And she's with her daughter!
...
Anyone can be a photographer. You just have to be willing to follow your prey and then, when you have them cornered, say the right thing to get a reaction. You're beautiful, you're gorgeous, you're a slut, you're a fat bitch, you're a bad mother who deserves to see your children die. Whatever."
Full article here: [www.guardian.co.uk]
01/29/09
01/29/09
It reminds me of something a journalist said after Princess Diana's death (I forget who): Basically, that the huge outpouring of public grief, with all the thousands of people in the UK travelling to London to lay flowers was ironic, given that these same people - the 'royal' fans, who bought all those gossip rags because of the pap pictures - were partly responsible for her death. The journalist saw a lot of the grief as sublimated guilt. That analysis has always stayed with me.
01/29/09
The red carpet shots, fine. But I don't believe that celebrities deserve to be followed to the supermarket and back by anyone, let alone a man shouting that they're a cunt.
01/29/09
But if the paparazzi really are hurling abuse and harassments, is that not illegal? What are California's laws against verbal abuse?
01/29/09
I know some celebs do stage paparazzi shots, and profit from them, but do photo editors know which is which, and choose accordingly?
Presumably the Guardian journalist was fact-checked, so yes, I'd hazard a guess she's telling the truth.
And there's always this: [uk]
01/29/09
Yes. I don't. Malia and Sasha can grow up without me trying to see every single moment of their lives.
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
Although I'm RATHER certain that none of the Jezzies here would be snarky or negative toward the Obama girls. I think it's almost impossible (and should result in disemvowelment if it does occur).
01/29/09
You've got to be fucking kidding me! He's not Tom Cruise. He's the PRESIDENT. Mess with that and you'll get Secret Service and the FBI on your ass.
P.S. Threatening the president is a crime. Just ask all those people who got arrested during the Bush years.