For the most part, I ignore news of drunken celebutants as much as possible. I highly admire Craig Fergusen's stance on leaving them alone and wishing them well, but mostly I relegate Britney, Lindsey, Paris, et al, to that class of "ditzy substance abusers who will burn out young."
However, I have to wonder how much nominal ditzy behavior becomes exaggerated (and encouraged) due to overwhelming attention. Not the fans, so much, but the media. Check out this new video of Britney hitting a parked car while trying to park. Not the part about her hitting the car and then never looking at it or leaving a note (although I suspect she'd be smart enough to know that any note she left would be stolen and posted on TMZ within seconds), but check out how many photographers are following her on a regular basis just waiting for her to drop a stitch.
How could you not go crazy living like that?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I couldn't. I swear, I'd leave a trail of mangled papparazzi in my wake.
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
I am sure that I couldn't handle it. I do sympathize a bit more for those that were thrust into the spotlight while they were still growing up, before they were mentally ready to understand and handle the attention, fame, and the impact that it would have on their lives.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I don't know that anyone can be mentally ready for it. She really should be surrounded with a private army, like prominent politicians have.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
Although I haven't fully considered it, I think I'd be okay with increased legal protection for celebrities against paparazzi, slander, and the like. So long as it protects me from having to hear about them, that is.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I just have to wonder who buys all these magazines. There is so many of them. I mean, there used to be a clear line between People, (which was an offshoot of Life)and the Star/Enquirer. I suppose the Star felt some dignity in not being the World Weekly News.
Then People spawned Us, which mined Hollywood for the most shocking cover stories possible, and then In Touch came along looking a lot like Us, but with headlines as made up as the Star. But they preserve a careful line of not being so far fetched.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
Confession #1: I totally read them. All the trashy magazines, in the line at the supermarket and at the gym. I like pretty clothes and I like gossip, but I believe gossip is horribly destructive when the topic is fellow people in the community and I don't want any part of that. However, I recognize there is a huge need in myself to talk about other people, and so...I read those magazines. I don't buy them, if that's even any better.
Confession #2: Britney has my sympathy. I think she's not that bright, clearly screwed up, and I don't see it getting any better. I think as a teenager, she was completely used and very ill-served. I also don't think there is anyone who despises her more than herself.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I totally read them. All the trashy magazines, in the line at the supermarket and at the gym.
Why? I understand the drive to gossip -- but wouldn't it be more fun to invent random fictional people and gossip about them?
Around the watercooler: "Forget Britney; did you hear what Astra did last week?"
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
I value the illusion of community. (in discussing characters I do not have to create myself.)
For imaginary characters, I do have a full-on, unoriginal crush on Spike that's heading into its third month.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Spike of the nice firm buttocks and chicks dig grey?
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
I have no idea what you're talking about. So...no?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Notting Hill Spike.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Thinking of celubutants and the attention they encourage/endure, I am reminded of a story that Nomemon occasionally tells of an attention-starved kid who would act like a dog in order to get kids to play with him. They treated him like a dog, which he was literally asking for, but it's still sad that he was treated so poorly.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Kind of like how I used to not turn my homework in to get attention from my teachers. At least, that's the only explanation that makes any sense.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
My roommates and I once considered turning our apartment into a halfway house for young endangered starlets.
We realized how much we survived of one another's support, and then we realized most of these girls don't have that.
I used to make fun of these young women, but now I mostly just feel bad for them, and wish I could help.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I think the best way to help is to not support, directly or indirectly, those who profit from their misery.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
I'd feel sorry for her if there weren't small children being endangered by her behavior.
Also, she has courted the attention aggressively in the past, so what did she think would happen? She has deals with magazines, changes clothes during the day to sell more pictures, and sold pictures of her ex-step-daughter without the permission of the little girl's mother. She goes to restaurants and night clubs where she knows there will be tons of photographers.
I feel sorry for people who genuinely don't want the attention, like Jennifer Aniston or Jodie Foster. Also, it is possible to avoid the media if you truly want to. Does anybody know anything about Christian Bale's private life? How about Cate Blanchett?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Also, she has courted the attention aggressively in the past, so what did she think would happen?
That's why it reminds me of Noemon's story.
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
quote:Also, she has courted the attention aggressively in the past, so what did she think would happen?
Of course, those decisions were largely made when she was only a child and less prepared to grasp the magnitude of the consequences. Not that that's an excuse, but I do sympathize a bit for those that have to try to decide which course of life leads to the most happiness before they can even grasp what happiness or life really is.
Sure, some children manage to handle fame and stardom in a healthy way, but I suspect that it is largely due to the good guidance of their parents.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
You know, Porter, that's a really apt comparison. It hadn't occurred to me before in those terms, but I definitely see the parallel.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That story has really stuck with me, Noemon. Thank you for sharing it.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
:) Sure. It's one I think about quite a bit too.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I'm pretty sure if I had papparazzi following me around all the time, the tabloid editors would eventually just get tired of all the pictures of me being an ass. "Here's yet another picture of Enigmatic hungover, pantsless, and flipping us off. Umm, got anything else?"
--Enigmatic
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
I'm pretty sure I'd be willing to spend money on a monthly tabloid showing Enigmatic being an ass.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:I'd feel sorry for her if there weren't small children being endangered by her behavior.
I guess I don't know enough about the situation to understand this. Or, I don't know what of the many things I've glimpsed are true.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I read that whats-his-bucket who plays Harry Potter in the movies wore identical clothes to and from the studio every day for six months, so that when papparazzi took a picture of him, it looked like it was from the same day as the pictures they took of him previously, and thus the pictures were less valuable.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
That's...a really good idea.
Noemon, if it's something you're alright with sharing, what story are you and mph referring to?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Daniel Radcliffe. And Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
That's hilarious. (The Radcliffe thing.)
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'd feel sorry for her if there weren't small children being endangered by her behavior. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess I don't know enough about the situation to understand this. Or, I don't know what of the many things I've glimpsed are true.
Well, I think there are some valid claims of drug and alcohol abuse going on. That's never a good situation for a kid to be in. Not to mention she often seems just clueless as a parent-- like installing a baby seat backwards, or not even putting your kid in one in a moving car.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: Noemon, if it's something you're alright with sharing, what story are you and mph referring to?
I don't have any problem with sharing it--I may have even related it here before. I don't have time to type it out or find a copy of it. If Porter doesn't beat me to it I'll find the last time I related it and paste the story into a post tonight. Or just, you know, type it out. :)
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
quote:Originally posted by camus: I'm pretty sure I'd be willing to spend money on a monthly tabloid showing Enigmatic being an ass.
<_< >_> How much money, and is online distribution okay?
--Enigmatic
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I'd find it on Sakeriver, because I know you've shared it there, Noemon, except that Sakeriver is down.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
The system is down. The system is down. Budeep budeep badoo doo doo doo.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I found it!
quote:When I was in late grade school there was this kid named Clayton that I knew. He didn't really have any friends, but he hung around the periphery of my group of friends. At recess, we would generally go to one spot or another on the playground and just stand around talking. Clayton was pretty desperate for attention, and very willingly pretended to be our dog. I think he may even have initiated it, honestly. He'd go around for the duration of each recess period, either crouched over or on his hands and knees, occasionally making barking noises while everyone else stood around talking. Occasionally one of us would throw him a starburst, which he would eat off the ground. The fact that he was a willing participant in his own humiliation doesn't make my memory of having been one of the people who demeaned him any more pleasant.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I have always felt sorry for Britney Spears and her comrades. How can anyone live like that? She basically has no life at all. She's past celebrity, she's just famously unhappy.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
That's the one. Thanks Porter!
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
It has to be difficult to balance the need for press to keep your career going, and the desire to have some semblance of a normal life. I agree with MPH - I don't read, buy, or discuss the information from celebrity gossip magazines. I certainly don't want to give money to the paparazzi who abuse people, and I'm not going to encourage my friends to support them by gossiping about the celebs.
Just because they entertain us, I don't see how that makes it OK for us to take away their privacy and prevent them from enjoying life. If anything, we should respect their privacy MORE in their personal lives, because they already give us so much of their life when they perform for us.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
I've run out of sympathy for Britney Spears. I just don't care anymore.
I hear and read far more about her life than I'd ever care to, largely just by doing the grocery shopping in my family. Yes, she entered fame way too young, and yes, there are people in her life who have probably exploited her.
But... She's twenty-six now, for crying out loud. She's a mother of two. She's put two marriages behind her. After shaving her head, going through rehab, sobbing during an interview, kissing Madonna, flipping off the paparazzi, caterwalling about her sex life on a reality show, and creating enough vapid and self-indulgent quotes to give a dozen comedians material for a year, I'm beginning to suspect that someone must have suggested that she keep her mouth shut and act like a grown-up for a while by now. And that person was ignored. The disturbing thing I'm seeing at the edges of stories is that the few people trying to rein her in are getting snubbed or cast aside.
She's one of the richest women in entertainment. It wouldn't be difficult to go somewhere else for a year and let the buzz die for a while, live a normal life. It's not like she's doing her image or career any service by the way she's acting in the public eye. She could leave and come back. Or she could just leave. But she won't.
The "ooh, I'm such a naughty little girl" thing was abhorrent enough when she was in her teens. To abhorrent, we've now added pathetic and seedy. The time in which one could believe she was an unwitting participant in the image she was projecting into our culture is long past. I pray that she and her ilk will have ceased affecting the world of fashion before my daughter hits puberty.
At best, I don't care about Britney Spears one way or another. At worst, I think that when you try to flog the horse of your own fame too hard for too long, the attention you eventually get isn't the kind you're used to. She's worth a hundred million dollars. Perhaps she can afford a clue.
Lindsey Lohan I can still feel a glimpse of sympathy for. At least at one point she seemed to show evidence of talent. And maybe she's still young enough to be willing to listen.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Hmm. I guess I feel less sympathy for Lohan. But I'm now remembering why I didn't like Spears in the first place, because I just couldn't figure out how "Hit me baby one more time" was an okay message.
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mrs.M: Does anybody know anything about Christian Bale's private life?
Well, I know he's married and I know where he's staying while in town shooting "The Dark Knight" because he's renting from a client.
To be honest, until Batman, I had no idea who Christian Bale even was....
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
He's in The Newsies .
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
I know so little about Christian Bale's private life that I didn't even know he was British until I read the wiki at work today.
I assumed he had an American accent, and was faking in The Prestige!
Posted by Lord Solar Macharius (Member # 7775) on :
To be a little more precise than "British", Bale's Welsh, and in fact was faking a (cockney?) accent in The Prestige.
It's easy to mistake him for American, as he decided to keep the accent on while doing press for Batman as a show of respect to such a cultural icon. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Like anybody can tell the difference between British accents. Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
Sterling, that was so well put.
quote:It has to be difficult to balance the need for press to keep your career going, and the desire to have some semblance of a normal life.
Not really. Some of the biggest stars have the most private personal lives. In addition to Christian Bale and Jodie Foster, there's Denzel Washington, Cate Blanchett, Keanu Reeves, Rachel Weisz, Natalie Portman, etc. All of them have great careers and a reasonable semblance of a normal life. Paul Simon doesn't get accosted by photographers when he shops, nor does Beyonce. It's easy to avoid the kind of publicity that Britney Spears has courted for years and still advance your career.
quote:If anything, we should respect their privacy MORE in their personal lives, because they already give us so much of their life when they perform for us.
They're being paid a lot of money to perform. By us. That's all that we owe them (it's nice if we give them loyalty and admiration, but we don't owe it to them). I think it can be argued that they are much more well-compensated for doing something they enjoy than, say, nurses, who give much more of themselves.
Look, I don't buy the magazines. But I shop in grocery stores and I go to a salon and I can't help but look at the headlines. Plus, I have friends in the entertainment industry and they like to talk about these things.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Do we owe them less respect than anyone else? What bugs me so much is that there's no way we would accept this kind of stalking and harassment as acceptable behavior if it happened to us, or anyone we know. So why do we think it's OK that celebrities are subject to it?
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Do we owe them less respect than anyone else? What bugs me so much is that there's no way we would accept this kind of stalking and harassment as acceptable behavior if it happened to us, or anyone we know. So why do we think it's OK that celebrities are subject to it?
Seconded.
No offense to the title creator but this dispensing of "sympathy" like some kind diety is kind of silly neh?
"I've decided to be nice and give celebrity my teensy bit of sympathy"
Thanks loads, now how about we judge the slime that spend all their time stalking these people?
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
quote:
Thanks loads, now how about we judge the slime that spend all their time stalking these people?
Judge 'em slime, apparently.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Do we owe them less respect than anyone else? What bugs me so much is that there's no way we would accept this kind of stalking and harassment as acceptable behavior if it happened to us, or anyone we know. So why do we think it's OK that celebrities are subject to it?
One reason why is because they are paid far more than they deserve, especially in comparison the average American, that it's easy to believe at some level that there's a karmic price to be paid.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:No offense to the title creator but this dispensing of "sympathy" like some kind diety is kind of silly neh?
"Sympathy" is not something that I've heard much coming from diety to mortals. Mercy, justice, grace, yes. Sympathy? No.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by Earendil18: No offense to the title creator but this dispensing of "sympathy" like some kind diety is kind of silly neh?
"I've decided to be nice and give celebrity my teensy bit of sympathy"
Thanks loads, now how about we judge the slime that spend all their time stalking these people?
Chris writes in a dry, understated, adult tone. Perhaps you have trouble reading it.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Now that was just mean.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:What bugs me so much is that there's no way we would accept this kind of stalking and harassment as acceptable behavior if it happened to us, or anyone we know. So why do we think it's OK that celebrities are subject to it?
The problem is how you define the limits of what's acceptable. Right now, it's pretty much legal to take a picture in a public place. In fact, there are important first amendment considerations to that protection - imagine if it had been illegal to videotape the Rodney King incident or to take pictures of someone dumping toxic chemicals in a river.
So once we accept a right to some form of public photography, we need to determine where to draw the line if we want to limit it. And I don't see how to draw such a line except in the context of already-defined criminal offenses - obstructing traffic, trespassing, assault, battery, etc.
Assuming no other law is being broken, how do you criminalize following someone around and taking pictures of what they do in public, while still allowing the "desirable" pictures to be taken?
We could base it on whether the activity being photographed is illegal or not. But then we have the problem of assigning criminal behavior to someone based on their accurate assessment of whether another person's given activity is legal or not. (Plus, the incident described in the opening post was illegal, so that rule wouldn't help.) We could base it on reasonable belief that a law was being broken, but I think that gets rid of some desirable public photographing - I think a lot of journalism uncovers legal acts that the public should know about.
If we go by a newsworthiness standard, we have the problem of defining newsworthiness. Is it based on what people are interested in? If so, then these are newsworthy. Is it based on some refined sense of what people should be interested in? I'm skeptical such a thing can be defined in a precise enough manner to avoid chilling desirable activities.
I'm not saying there's not a way to do this. I'm saying none of the ways I've seen proposed or have thought of myself avoid problems I consider more significant.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Dag, I'm pretty sure that MC was not talking about this in a strictly legal sense. I think he was talking about people's apparent approval (or lack of disapproval) of this.
If we actually respected celebrities as we ourselves would like to be respected, what he was talking about wouldn't be a problem.
---
As an aside, what would the legality be of pulling a Henry II "Who will rid me of this troubling papparazo?" sort of thing by sending messages to one's crazed fans that you really, really wish someone could take care of these people for you?
Would you be liable if some of your fans commited crimes against these people?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
MC was simply the catalyst for a lot of thoughts I've had on this topic. Whether what you say is true or not (and it likely is) has no effect on the underlying issues of regulating the behavior. Moreover, the same types of issues apply to judging the acceptability of the behavior, although I think the acceptable margin of error is far greater once we aren't talking about the use of government power.
Quite simply, the problem is defining the behavior to be punished or simply frowned on, and I think it's deceptively difficult to define this behavior. The definition can be somewhat fuzzy if we are only speaking of frowning on the behavior.
quote:As an aside, what would the legality be of pulling a Henry II "Who will rid me of this troubling papparazo?" sort of thing by sending messages to one's crazed fans that you really, really wish someone could take care of these people for you?
Would you be liable if some of your fans commited crimes against these people?
I don't know - sounds like a good episode of "Law and Order."
The most likely elements of contention would be causation - did the statement actually cause the death - and knowledge/intent - can the prosecutor prove that the intended result was the death of a photographer or that the likelihood of death was so high that the celebrity knew (in a legal sense, which includes some form of "should have known") that death would result.
The case would be easier to make against the celebrity if the photographer, killer fans, and celebrity were all at the same place at the same time and far more difficult if the statement was made on TV (say, repeatedly over the course of weeks) and the fan stalked and killed the photographer.
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese:
quote:Originally posted by Earendil18: No offense to the title creator but this dispensing of "sympathy" like some kind diety is kind of silly neh?
"I've decided to be nice and give celebrity my teensy bit of sympathy"
Thanks loads, now how about we judge the slime that spend all their time stalking these people?
Chris writes in a dry, understated, adult tone. Perhaps you have trouble reading it.
No, she's right, I definitely missed it.
Phanto's right . Judge 'em slime apparently.
*foot in mouth*
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
My apologies, Earendil18. I was not in a good state to be posting this morning, and I was caustic and mean, as mph noted
Thanks for taking it so graciously.
---
Edited to add: Even if you missed it, the comment I made could surely have been worded better. I will strive to maintain a less crass countenance in the future.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: One reason why is because they are paid far more than they deserve, especially in comparison the average American, that it's easy to believe at some level that there's a karmic price to be paid.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. First, how do we judge who makes too much money? If you don't like their salary, don't go to the movies or buy the records. But more importantly, do you really want to suggest that the more money a person makes, the more punishment they deserve? I don't understand the idea of punishing success. What about being successful incurs negative karma?
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Like anybody can tell the difference between British accents.
I'm becoming more and more aware of the Welsh accent from watching Dr. Who. Since they film in Cardiff, they seem to recruit a lot of welsh actors in supporting roles. My friends and I joke about it sometimes, like the little boy who won the competition to be in an episode only won because he was welsh.
Wow, this came off as a really Dr. Who-fangirly post. Continue on, good citizens.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I don't like vultures.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: One reason why is because they are paid far more than they deserve, especially in comparison the average American, that it's easy to believe at some level that there's a karmic price to be paid.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. First, how do we judge who makes too much money? If you don't like their salary, don't go to the movies or buy the records. But more importantly, do you really want to suggest that the more money a person makes, the more punishment they deserve? I don't understand the idea of punishing success. What about being successful incurs negative karma?
I never said that it is a correct or defensible position to take.
You asked why people think it's OK to invade the privacy of celebrities, and I answered by giving a reason why people tend to do so.
I suggest nothing, but I do say that people tend to think that way on some level.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
The accent of the Doctor seems to be more scottish nowadays.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
As to celebrities in the news, I think for the most part they add up to the biggest collection of non-stories to ever waste printed space.
I remember photos of Rupert Grint and a friend at the beach buying ice cream. Oh.... there's earth shattering news - 'Kid Buys Ice Cream!' - stop the presses!
I remember the big deal of Prince Harry wearing what was allegedly a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress (costume) party. He wasn't in an SS uniform, he was wearing a khaki military style shirt with an arm band, and normal slacks and normal shoes.
That seem, especially to a young man, to be an infinitely superior costume. You want to go to McDonalds for a snack...arm band off, and your normal. Back to the party...arm band on, and your in costume. Also, he rented this from a local costume shop. If it was so terrible, why did the costume shop have it? That choice was certainly better that running around London in a fuzzy bunny suit.
Again, I see that as a non-story, and I think Harry father responded appropriately.
At the same party photos of Harry making out with a girl surfaced. Once again, my reaction was "Stop the presses!" "Boy Kissses Girl!" Who would have ever guessed that?
And that is essentially what you have, a non-story with a photo to back it up. Without the photo, and the money the photos provide for the photographer, there is no story. But since when is a photo a story? I remember a photo of Prince William walking back from the grocery store. That's all, just walking down the street carrying a shopping bag. That rated a full page big headline spread. Really, how big a NON-story is that?
Prince William and Prince Harry were shown at a nightclub drinking and getting friendly with some girls. Apparently that too was headline news. Yet, no mention of the other 500 people in the club who were also drinking and getting friendly. Apparently if a celebrity behaves normally, somehow...that is headline news...somehow.
Steve/BlueWizard
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: The accent of the Doctor seems to be more scottish nowadays.
Nope. Though David Tennant is himself Scottish, on Dr. Who he speaks with an Estuary accent. Only on one episode does he 'pretend' to be from Scotland.
Okay, I've really got to stop now.
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: My apologies, Earendil18. I was not in a good state to be posting this morning, and I was caustic and mean, as mph noted
Thanks for taking it so graciously.
---
Edited to add: Even if you missed it, the comment I made could surely have been worded better. I will strive to maintain a less crass countenance in the future.
Awww group hug!
You too Chris.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
It's okay, sarcasticmuppet. I own a sonic screwdriver.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)