posted
I hate them. I have to see them when I am at work. Stars at the beach, their flabbly bodies shown off for the world to see. This one is having an affair with a married man, this one is getting married for the 40th time. And, J-lo is dating yet another man. I don't care! I don't want to hear about it. I have no interest. We should respect the privacy of famous people. Yes they make movies and star on shows and make movies, but does this mean I have to know every little detail? Sure, if they want to talk about themselves, where they come from, that sort of thing, that is not so bad, but most the paparazzi actively pry into their lives? Can't movie stars take their kids to the park without getting photographed? Sure, actors are special and hard working, but having no private life is a poor way to repay them.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The less meaning people have in their lives (religion, family, work) - the more likely they are to turn to the entertainment world to cling. Take a look at children for proof - they are more shallow than adults, and therefore more likely to know EVERY fact about their favorite member in a band. This stimulates the tabloid business. Heh, maybe we can combat it by instilling values in some people!
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know, I am one to talk, I get my little crushes every now and again, but that's just all it is, a tiny harmless crush. i do not wish to know every detail. These people are not my friends confiding secrets in me, they are people that I admire and as I admire them, I should respect their privacy, right? Right. Plus it doesn't help that most famous people are REALLY BORING. I do not CARE what they ate for breakfast or how many cars they have, if they have interesting political views, true spirituality or love thier wives then that is rather cool, but other than that, WHO CARES?!?!
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my experience, though, newspaper reporters are better than TV reporters. They don't have to struggle for ratings as much. People either buy the newspaper or they don't. The only news article that has the potential to drive up sales is the banner one, and only if something really momentous happens, so there's no real need for a reporter writing a story that is going to be buried in section F to be sensationalistic. Also, a newspaper reporter has considerably more space than a TV reporter in which to tell the whole story.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, but I would not consider a tabloid to be a newspaper.
As far as bat boy is concerned, I think that the information about who is having an alien baby or big foot's baby is much more interesting.
Donald E. Westlake has written a couple of books that really rip on tabloid journalism at its finest. I would recommend them, but I am to lazy to go into my library and get the titles (it is Sunday morning).
Posts: 279 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Weekly World News did not have a cover story about a baby? No big foot baby? No half alien baby? No bat boy? No 350 pound baby? What is this world coming too!
P.S. I thought Cheney was a puppeteer, not a robot.
Posts: 279 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, the freak headline had a smaller pic of a baby with tattoos all over its face. So yes, the freakish baby thread is still alive and well.
Posts: 1870 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I care about them. I just don't want to hear about their sex lives when I'm too busy trying to get one of my own.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The tabloids aren't the sad part. The tabloid readers are. That's what you should complain about.
Posts: 238 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay. That I can understand. I never read tabloids, or famous-people magazines, come to that, except to make fun of them (They're good that way), but I admit I do tend to get swept up in the whole "famous" thing.
I like to imagine and wonder, but you're right, I don't want to know about the fake details of their lives. Also, I feel bad for them. How would you like people making up stuff about you and recording for every action?
posted
I read an article years back about a man who previously worked at the Enquirer. There was no problem getting stories. All he had to do was write a small story for the back pages about a werewold terrorizing local children or something, and within a week he'd have hundreds of letters and phone calls from people who knew all about it. Then he'd interview them over the phone and write the front page story for the next edition. Never left the office, never had to research anything.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
