More handpicked essays just for you.
The effects of the paparazzi
Paparazzi and celebrity conflicts essay
Paparazzi and celebrity conflicts essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The paparazzi have been so much looked upon for interfering with people’s lives especially celebrities but, the world still has to know that there are more of the paparazzi than professional journalists. Everyone can choose to be paparazzi with this era of cameras but not everyone can choose to be a professional journalist because it requires a good level of education. The paparazzi have however, dominated the world with their wired ideas of following up people. But it is very important to know what prompts them to do this.
INTRODUCTION
Paparazzo or paparazzi is an Italian word that describes photojournalists who are free lensed and do photography of celebrities, politicians, and famous people. Most of the time, they do this individually and do not work for any media house or organization. But, they take pictures and sell them to newspapers, magazines, and some book publishing companies.They mostly engage in gossip besides following up people to find evidence. However, they are the most despised media practitioners”. (Mendelson, 2007, p. 170). On the other hand, a professional journalist is that skilled journalist who takes and uses photographs to tell a news story and does not go against any journalistic ethics.
According to (MCcairley, 2009, p.5) the work of photo journalists has become subject to increased restrictions from both states, and private bodies following recent terrorist incidents. In regard to this statement has been the increase of paparazzi because they want to shoot photographs and sell. Photojournalists have been restricted in taking photographs for security reasons and thus the paparazzi take advantage of the situation.
Paparazzi have always and will always be the “scape goats” (Henry Flores, a popular paparazz...
... middle of paper ...
... public, just in the same way photojournalists do. Henry Flores an American paparazzi wrote in his article (Paparazzo, our work should be respected) demanding for respect of the paparazzi from the public
References
Mendelson, A. L. (2007). On the function of the United States paparazzi: mosquito swarm or watchdogs of celebrity image control and power. Visual Studies, 22(2), 169-183.
Nordhaus, J. E. (1999). Celebrities' rights to privacy: How far should the paparazzi be allowed to go. Rev. Litig., 18, 285.
MCcairley, D. (2009). Photojournalists. An endangered species in Europe, 1-36. Retrieved from www.if).org/asssets/docs/023/.../2cdcf17-bac4cf.pdf
Osterreicher, M. (2012). Photojournalist or paparazzo. a distinction with a difference, Retrieved from F:NPPA Advocacy Committee » Blog Archive » Photojournalist or Paparazzo a Distinction with a Difference.hmt
The question of paparazzi threatening privacy and First Amendment rights is often to situational to argue in a conventional manner, but certainly there are many facets of the issue which can be addressed in a quite straightforward manner. Celebrities who feel they have the right to privacy in public places often muddy the waters of this issue. Oddly enough, those celebrities who have chosen to speak out against what they feel are violations of their privacy most always begin their campaigns with a large press conference. In other words, they gather together those people they wish to not only suppress but also berate in hopes that these people will use their positions and skills to carry these celebrity's messages to the public. Is often seems that theses celebrities want it "both ways" in that they appreciate coverage when they have a movie, record, or book coming out, but not at any other time.
As celebrities stand distinctively among the masses and cast out their halos of personality charm and strong suits of skilled abilities, the controversies about them are unavoidable shadows created from their fame. With the popularization of celebrity culture, information synchronization, and communication technology, their lives are publicly exposed and various forms of media (depending on eras) record their flaws. Tough information transmitted to audiences are frequently biased, evidences of objective reality remains, even in the remote past.
...her and the more modern case of Brian Walski demonstrates the importance of ethics in the mass media. With the public dependent on photographers for images that will give an accurate and true representation of the facts, in some cases even leading to such important decisions as giving relief aid, waging war, or determining votes in an election, it is vitally important that journalistic images be true and unaltered likenesses of real persons and events. Even apparently innocent misrepresentations, designed to create a better image or better prove a point, can have serious consequences for the photographer, the subjects of the image, and the public. It is a reminder of the importance of honesty in all professions.
...uld be justifiable to emphasize that a good number of them find it sickening to miss the limelight. . Nonetheless, it goes without mentioning that celebrities get exploited because some gossip stories explore the things that would otherwise be considered to be private.
After observing and researching all the sources portraying celebrities I have came into a conclusion that todays society it seems like all we want is to be accepted and we tend to look at other people and judge. Its not right, we all are different and thats what makes the world go round. It would be a pretty boring world if we were all the same. Celebrities deal with this everyday, I think the paparazzi know more about some celebrities lives than they actually do. They judge them for who they are and what they do, it is not right nor fair.
The public has been revolutionary to have access into celebrities’ private life thanks to the “paparazzi”. Definitely, celebrities will always be in front of the camera. It comes with the frame. Nevertheless, it does not justify photographing and the lives of people at the expanse of their privacy.
Photographing an individual whether famous or not in public will not violate that person’s privacy under the laws in most countries. Assuming the paparazzi isn’t assaulting someone or trespassing or otherwise doing something illegal while taking such a picture, he or she will not be violating the law. Public figures do not ask for a total invasion of their privitness .Few of us lead lives that are not classified into a newsworthy. Just because these people contribute to their profession in front of the world, it does not mean that they should be denied the right to privacy and respect. Therefore Paparazzi should be banned from exposing people’s private lives, any way they want.
The deception of media consumers allows for the abuse of economic infrastructures of society. An obsession with celebrities’ lives passifies ordinary people in accepting the stratification of the elite businesses and the ordinary citizens. Though pseudo-events and celebrity worship may not be exactly complementary, the similarities of both leaves the public to be utterly vulnerable unless they begin to critically think for themselves.
George Clooney said at a press conference supermarket tabloids and television shows have made “bounty hunters” out of the photographers. He challenged editors to clean up their act or have others do it for them.
Over the last few decades celebrity and fame has changed dramatically, from Alexander the Great to Kim Kardashian. Talent and achievements no longer play a huge role when it comes to our celebrities. “Much modern celebrity seems the result of careful promotion or great good looks or something besides talent and achievement” (Epstein2) with that being said celebrity-creation has blossomed into an industry of its own. Keeping up with all the gossips from breaking up to hooking up, law suits and drama many might come to an agreement that celebrity culture is starting to be the great new art form in our new generation and that it ...
In earlier times, it was much easier to keep your business to yourself, but with the increase in journalism and increase in technology, it has become progressively harder to keep your privacy. Included in the advances of technology, the first handheld camera, which was lighter than the outdated studio cameras, was introduced by Eastman Kodak. Through the debut of the camera, this allowed common people to start taking pictures, pictures of whatever they wanted. There was no issue when cameras first came out, because no one thought about the issues that could arise. Speaking on journalism, this modern outlet also provided a way to show people across the country what was happening in a different location
The term paparazzi is defined as a freelance photographer, usually one who takes candid pictures of celebrities for publication. The term originated from the surname of the 1959 Federico film, La Dolce Vita. Now, the connotation that arises from the word “paparazzi” is much stronger than just a freelance photographer. The paparazzi are annoying, persistent photographers who, in essence, stalk their celebrity victims and go to any length necessary to get the photograph they desire. But, the paparazzi are doing their job to please the public. Paparazzi tend to target celebrities that fascinate the public; the public’s obsession encourages the paparazzi in their pursuit. The public never calls out the paparazzi for invading the celebrities’ privacy; they only call them out when harm or threats come to the celebrity (Nordhaus 286).
They want to know everything about them and have a desire for more information. Celebrities should have their right to privacy due to historical/practical rights, their invasion of privacy with paparazzi, and their childrens’ rights to privacy. They are ordinary people just with a famous role in life. Historical/practical rights are one of the biggest issues and it all started back in colonial America. In colonial America, privacy was constrained.
When it comes to the topic of should the private lives of famous people be off limits to the media, most of us will readily agree that no private life should be entirely off limits. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of how the media always finds their way into the life of the artist. Whereas some are convinced that the media should not interfere into the private lives of the celebrity, others maintain that because even if they make a lot of fans happy, they can always live a life of loneliness. I agree that the private lives of a famous person should be off limits to the media because they might have everything in the world but underneath all that they might be living their life melancholy and loneliness.
According to Steven Knowlton, author of Moral Reasoning for Journalists, "Celebrities of all sorts-musicians, athletes, entertainers, and others-make their living from the public and the public therefore in a sense employs them, just as it employs governors and presidents..."(54). Most journalists figure that celebrities voluntarily surrender their pr...