by Lara McKusky

Created on: October 29, 2008

The whole mess with the paparazzi debate has been centering generally around two ideas: celebrities want the attention to boost their careers and it would be against the first amendment. Both are a load of hogwash and I'll tell you why: we the consumers of such information are creating a demand. We are the ones who have created and perpetuated the problem. It's like the chicken and the egg: which came first, the sensationalized stories and photos? Or the voyeuristic hunger of the audience to know more about the people they see on the big screens?

Let's tackle this one thing at a time. First of all, I don't know anyone that says, "Hey have you seen so and so in the rag magazines? That poor person is a mess.I can't wait to see their next movie!" Additionally, how is a picture of them grocery shopping or fighting with their spouse truly boosting their careers? That's the craziest thing I've ever heard! The paparazzi take pictures because people are willing to buy them to print them for us to consume. Period. It is a business. Saying the celebrities want cameras shoved in their faces at inappropriate, private times is a cover, and a bad one, for our, the audiences', poor behavior and appetites! Shame on us for demanding more and more intimate details, for seeking it out and passing it around! They are still private citizens, no matter that their job is in the public eye. They are not making national policy here! They are making movies to entertain! That does not give us the right to know their every move and decision, to watch them eat and change clothes and fight with their families. The paparazzi have also broadened their horizons to stalking family and friends of celebrities as well; tell me, how does that boost a celebrity's career, having their family stalked? That has nothing to do with their jobs. What crappy personal decisions they might be making or what crisis they are going through has no impact on whether or not I see their new movie; whether or not they are good at their job, however, does!

Now some have tried to wrest control of their lives back, by making deals with some of the more popular, less unsavory entertainment magazines, selling "first pictures" and "inside glimpses." But really, they are making things worse! It only fuels the appetites of the reader!

Secondly, the First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>