The paparazzi - a fusion of the Italian words papatacci, meaning gnat and razzi meaning the popping of flashbulbs. It is also known as aggressive photography. The word paparazzo was coined by Federico Fellini, the name he gave to a prying society cameraman in his 1959 film "La Dolce Vita". Paparazzi photographers are fueled by large sums of money offered by the tabloid press. They try to catch the rich and famous in unflattering situations.
The new breed of journalism grew by leaps and bounds after the Watergate scandal first broke in Washington, DC (Petersen's, 57). At first the paparazzi were an annoying group of photographers who were persistent when trying to get the perfect shot of a celebrity so they could sell the image for large sums of money but as technology became more advanced so did the equipment the paparazzi used - telephoto lenses, hi-tech listening devices, and powerful zoom lenses on video cameras.
No major celebrity can avoid them. Emerging from cars, entering glittering parties or trying to take a secluded vacation, the glamour figures of the '90s are hounded mercilessly by the men-and a few women-who wield long lenses and a brazen shamelessness (Maclean, 38). Today, paparazzi's tread on private property, film celebrities during intimate moments, and even go as far as stalking a public figure.
Some of these photos can be worth in the millions of dollars. A single photograph of Prince Charles seen together with his mistress Camilla Parker-Bowles is estimated to be worth 5 million English pounds. The prince says he "would love to figure out a way for the proceeds to go to charity" (Newsweek, 95).The prince and his mistress usually arrive and depart at different times in order to avoid the paparazzi when they attend a function together.
The prince has been lucky. Almost all well known faces have had run-ins with the paparazzi but many have horror stories to tell. The Screen Actors Guild has been concerned with the paparazzi and how it affects many of it's 100,000 members. "The death of princess Diana was the final straw" according to the SAG president, Richard Masur. He, along with California Senators Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and three respected constitutional scholars had a meeting to discuss what could be done about the paparazzi. In less than four hours, they came up with the rough wording of S. 2103 (Quill, 27).
Before...
... middle of paper ...
...g with the intent to capture audio or video images of a celebrity or crime victim engaging in a personal or family activity. It will allow the celebrity or crime victim to recover damages from the paparazzi and people who employ them (Victorville). According to Andrea Brown, a spokesperson for former governor Pete Wilson, "The governor thought it was important because of safety issues for normal everyday people. These people deserve to conduct their personal lives in private. Technology requires changes in any law. It creates new ways for people to commit crimes."
After all the research done on the pro's and con's of new laws that would affect the paparazzi it's easy to see how these laws could affect people on both sides of the issue. Paparazzi photographers have to make a living and the famous deserve their privacy. Celebrities know that with fame comes the loss of privacy but they do not deserve to loss all privacy and not all paparazzi photographers are ruthless, shameless, aggressive people. The laws that came into effect on January 1st, 1999 were only to restrain the most aggressive of photographers. We can only hope that the paparazzi will learn when they've gone too far.
New technology has fuelled the expansion with the growth of phone apps, social media formats, smartphones able to capture video and upload instantly onto the web. The public is now recording, documenting, sharing and viewing events as they happen, often before professional journalist or reporters. Technology allows people to view major events in real time anywhere in the world, creating a ‘global village’ in which everyone is connected (McLuhan 1964; cited in Giddens 2013). However, the mass medias of television, radio and newspapers both in print and online, continue to be the mediums the public accesses the news and events on a local, national and international
Marshall P. David (1997). Celebrity Power; Fame in Contemporary Culture. May 16, 2010. Electronically retrieved from
Imagine yourself rich and famous, living the modern American Dream. Now, imagine constantly being stalked by a herd of random strangers bombarding you with cameras. Over the years, the paparazzi have sought scandals from celebrities in order to receive money. In the process, they have stripped thousands of celebrities from their privacy rights. According to the 2006 blog, “The Digital Paparazzi”, there have been 1,360 different events between the years of 1999 and 2010 involving the intrusive photographers (Sim and Adcock, n.p.). They have caused numerous headaches, injuries, and even deaths. The abuse from paparazzi has gotten extreme to the point where the Congress has created a set of laws, restricting them from certain exploits.
No matter where a person goes throughout the United States, they will not walk through the streets of New Jersey or New York for long before they hear the latest scandals with Kim Kardashian or Miley Cyrus. If a person walks into any public store they’ll quickly hear discussion of the latest stars on American Idol from passersby. While we scoff at the antics of celebrities, but at the same time we can foster an almost fanatical desire to be as if not more famous then the people everyone talks about. It is rather human to feel envy, jealously, and desire; we all want to be looked favorably upon. We roll our eyes when someone repeatedly states how beautiful or intelligent a celebrity is, yet even a skeptic can’t help but desire the admiration that celebrity received. Why do men work out? Why do women use such extensive amounts of cosmetics? Why are people so determined to be revered? The answer to individual’s thirst for fame can vary but it’s unavoidable to assume that individual wanted to be the center of attention. We want to be admired, favored, and loved as much as the celebrities that we worship. Reality television has shifted to show the “perfect” life of our celebrities and how happy they are compared to the common people. Neoliberals and authoritarian realized how our fanatical love for our celebrities can be used against us as to quote Frank Furedi from his academic journal on the topic of celebrity culture in which he has stated in the abstract in his first page: “Often celebrity provides an alternative source of validation. The tendency to outsource authority to the celebrity represents an attempt to bypass the problem of legitimacy by politicians and other figures.” Through celebrities’ neoliberals and
When considering the issue of celebrities receiving unfair treatment by making their punishment worse than a regular persons is totally un orthodox so it is essential to know that their regular too. Also all people don’t know what rules they are violating or what rules they need to know so they won’t violate them. All people aren’t guilty neither are they all innocent but they should suffer equal consequences.
...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.
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 addition, if someone was fallowing you, taking pictures and bullying you every day single day, you would instantly report them to the police and they would without a doubt get the stalkers arrested, and they would get a restraining order. But if a celebrity calls the cops saying that there is someone following them and harassing them, no one is willing to protect them, because they are not able to stop the paparazzi for good. It 's like all celebrities are being punished for being rich and successful. Nobody deserves
We are part of a generation that is obsessed with celebrity culture. Celebrities are distinctive. Media and consumers alike invented them to be a different race of super beings: flawless, divine and above all the real moral world. In a 1995 New York Times article “In contrast, 9 out of 10 of those polled could think of something
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.
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).
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.
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...
Should celebrities have their right to privacy? Before newspapers, television, and the internet, ordinary people were not exposed to endless stories about celebrities. Today however, we are bombarded with information about who is dating whom, where they eat, and what they wear from magazines such as People, Entertainment Weekly, and Star. Also, most ordinary people respect the rights of others to a private life. However, some people are just obsessed to get information out of celebrities. 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.
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.