Celebrity

Since the advent of television and the Internet it seems there are few people in the world who are not celebrities. There was a time when people became famous for being talented in some way, perhaps for inventing or discovering something, or for winning a prestigious award, or something requiring the slightest ounce of intelligence.

Since the creation of television people began to be famous for simply being on television. At first this was at least credible in some sense as it could perhaps have been for being a serious actor or musician, but over the course of the past half century celebrity status has degraded and no longer holds any credibility whatsoever.

It wasn't until the end of the century however until it started to be taken to extremes. The biggest culprit of this is perhaps reality television. No longer do television programmes contain any thought provoking or intellectual content (except for the few specific channels dedicated to this, namely The Discovery Channels), instead they continue to degrade, seemingly on purpose to find the lowest level of programming that people will watch.

These reality shows often feature people locked together in houses being filmed sitting scratching their arses all day doing nothing interesting at all. The worst part is that people sit and watch on interactive channels all day long, so instead of doing something interesting with their lives they sit and watch other people’s lives, which are much more boring than their own.

Other programmes feature peoples homes being re-decorated, and mostly the homes end up looking like restaurants or bordellos, and always done in such a way that it would be impossible to live with it...and let's not forget that these shows are the reason peoples homes now contain so much mdf. They are not only reducing the quality of the programming, but now the quality of our furniture.

In addition to these awful shows, we also have to endure the outcomes of them in the media. There are "newspapers" that no longer deliver much news on current affairs, but show us celebrities doing their shopping, on the beach or out with their friends. This is something which, I think, should be made illegal. No-one, be they an actor, a singer or a member of the public should be able to have photographs of themselves shown in publications without their explicit consent.

There are magazines completely dedicated to celebrity, such as Heat or OK, which feature celebrities wedding photographs in addition to the candid ones that are seen in tabloids.

The most tragic outcome of this is when these paparazzi scum chased down Princess Diana's car back in 1997 which led to her death. The media couldn't even be respectful then, having the show the funeral on television, as well as people who did not know her being upset as if she were there closest friend.
The royal family is also quite a large part of the media these days. Throughout history kings and queens have been rulers of this country, leading us and always being held in the uttermost respect, and now they seem little less than a tourist attraction. I am not saying that it would be better to have a single ruler instead of a democracy, but it would be better to have a proper reigning monarch than a parliament as it stands today, but that is for a different discussion.

With the advent of the Internet it seems that this celebrity fashion has grown worse, as information can be transmitted to a much wider audience, and also can reach them much faster than before.

It seems no-one is famous for being talented anymore, simply famous for being famous.

Hopefully one day people will realise the futility of buying magazines to see photographs of celebrities doing their shopping or trying to share private time with their friends, but until that day comes these people will continue to waste their time and effort invading the privacy of others.

Great. Thanks for that Dad.

Care to join in the discussion then or simply mock me? I'm not trying to force my opinions onto others, simply to start an intelligent discussion for once, and as you replied so quickly after I posted I assume you did'nt even bother to read it all.

I assure you I did read it, 3 years of pouring over history books makes you a quick reader, anyway I didnt actually need to; nothing there that hasnt been said many times before.

Are you a media studies student or something? Was there a point to it or have you been having a christmas tipple O.o (thats made you all reflective and er philosphical)

and why exactly is that? I realize the paparazzi can be taking things a bit too far, ie. photos of Dorothea breastfeeding - come on - nobody wants to see this. On the other hand, people are being photographed in public ALL the time, showing up in print or television. It would be extremely difficult to demand a written statement of consent everytime you take a picture of that old building while on vacation, etc. It is simply unpractical.

As for celebrities, I really don't care, no they shouldn't be followed to an extent as some of them are and they should be left alone when they are having sex in their own bedrooms. On the other hand, photos of celebrities doing some shopping on Rhodeo Drive sell magazines and selling is a good thing :P

Most TV programmes in Spain have their celebrity section - and I just can't stand it. I think it's incredibly sad for people to discuss these so-called celebrities lives. Why should we care whether they go Christmas shopping or are drunk?

It's just plain boring to me. And everyone else seems to be so up to date with what's going one with each one of these people. And I'm the weird one for not giving an inch about them. Yeah, right...

Also what bugs me is that they sell their lives and then complain when they have paparazi following them. Aha! So it has to be whenever they want. If you don't want your every move to be seen by others just don't sell bits of your life in the first place. Oh dear - it's just one big circus, isn't it?

I'm not referring to shots of crowds and such, but when paparazzi specificly target single people and take up close and personal photos of them.

I presume you mean people like Catherine Zeta Jones and Michael Douglas selling their wedding photographs and such. If they "sell" part of their life like this it does not give people the right to follow them everywhere and photograph their every move.

I think celeBRATies are over rated, they are just people like everyone else, they pee the same as the next person. The amount they get paid for just being a celebrity is disgusting, they are not doing or achieving anything that special, they loook good in front of a camera or they present a tv show, woo wee , big deal .....

Dawn

Exactly Dawn. That is what I meant by saying people are famous for being famous now. They are being payed ludicrous ammounts of money for doing very little, albeit they are only paid because people are gullible enough to pay to see them doing these things.

If someone enjoys writing songs, singing or acting and they are good at it they should be able to use the media to share themselves with the world, but that shouldn't automatically give the world the right to follow them around and criticise them constantly. They are currently surveilled and no longer have any privacy. Just because they may have some talent in some area doesn't give us the right to follow them all the time.

Obviously those who are famous for being famous choose to do this as they are attention seekers, but the few remaining celebrities that still have any discernable talent should not have to endure the spotlight for any longer than they wish to.

Are you serious? So you think it's okay for them to be on the spotlight* only when they want to? Of course I'm not saying it's right for people to stalk them or anything. But I think it's quite cheeky on the part of celebrities to sell things and then go to court when they are photographed without being paid. They could avoid that not seeling their wedding pictures or whatever in the first place.

I wasn't particularly talking about Catherine Zeta Jones and Michael Douglas - about celebrities in general more like.

*on the spotlight here meaning just bcause and not because they're releasing an album or anything. I gather we're talking about those so-called celebrities that come from Big Brother or because they were the brother in law's neighbour's cousin's shop attendant's sister's ex to Mr X...