Limitations Of Paparazzi By La Dolce Vita

In this digital era, it is not difficult to find information about celebrities. All sorts of information are up for public to read and observe, no matter how personal it is. Even private addresses of stars have been posted in both gossip columns and traditional media outlets like USA Today. As we all know, celebrities are in the spotlight because of the media. Celebrities make news all the time. And when you have two birds of the same feather, you can only expect bigger news. From an article Donna Freydkin implies that, readers go to the tabloids for whatever information about their favorite artists. Almost all Most of the information comes from an unknown source, whose may not be credible. For instance, former child stars-turned-designer duo Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen turned 26 years old this year. Following their acting debut as infants, the twins appeared together in a variety of TV, film and video projects throughout their child and teenage

The word ‘celebrity’ is “rooted in the Latin celebritas or celebration” They are followed by news reporters, you see them in television, they have fans. Someone is famous because they are well known within a particular community for some achievement. In Anthony Ferri “Emergence of the Entertainment Age?” he says “Celebrities abound in the media today largely because of the improved technology allows celebrities and fans to access each other directly.” In Emma Bazilian “The faces of Kylie” she introduces

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

That might sway the way a person thinks about that person. Celebrities have a right to their own private

Kim Kardashian is considered to be a "selfie queen" in the world of celebrities. One of the primary hosts of Keeping Up With The Kardashians, has recently been on a vacation. It may not be the best vacation and lifestyle that she has right now, but it'll be memorable. You know the reason why? It is because she had over 6,000 selfies during her 4-day vacation in Mexico. Last Wednesday, he took over the website of her sister, Kendall Jenner, to show her vacation and lifestyle selfies. On top of that, she's wearing around 9 different swimsuits in her 4-day stay at Mexico. Not only that, it was shown that she drank 10 glasses of watermelon smoothies and four times spending at the beach. How cool is that for you, Kim? While others are just working,

According to Deborah King's article, “The Impact Celebrities Have on Our Lives” she explains how people these days are celebrity obsessed. More specifically, people will stalk celebrities or do what they do. Case in King presents the following idea, “ For many people, not a day goes by when they don’t sneak a peek at their favorite celebrity gossip website” (section 1, paragraph 1). This reveals that some people go on websites that talk about celebrities almost everyday. People go on these websites to catch up on celebrities lives because of how much gossip is on the websites everyday. Sometimes this gossip may be false or a rum0or. One can infer that people who go on these websites like TMZ.com fall for these rumors and strart sto spread them more whe the whole situaltion was just a lie or a misunderstanding. One can also infer that the celebrity is upset or embarrassed because these rumors aren't true. Starting rumors about celebrities must have started because someone was stalking a celebrity which is basically being obsessed with

The media covering our everyday lives all over has opened up numerous different ways to get yourself entertained. This, in conjunction, is bound to create celebrities. And even though some people are in it just for the money and fame, other ones are actually working for a genuinely good cause.

After reading “Privacy” by William Prosser, I find myself questioning whether the existence of “legitimate public curiosity about the personality of celebrities” is reason enough for the press to release trivial, exaggerated information about public figures’ lives (416). While I understand that with fame comes a dedicated fan base, it does not seem logical to conclude that consequently, because these fans are fascinated by celebrities’ lives, the press should have access to stars’ less publicized information. As Prosser points out, there is “an enormous amount of petty gossip” published so that newspapers can profit off of irrelevant, sensationalized stories that appeal to the public’s unquenchable thirst to live vicariously through stories

One day Gaga was strolling down the streets of Chicago when her appearance caught attention of the local police officers. The famous celebrity was cited for wearing "hot pants" and exposing her body in public.

Celebrities are everywhere in the news, the latest gossip appears in the weekly magazines without fail. Whether they be an actor, athlete, dancer, designer, model, singer or just rich; there is someone out there who is watching that person like a hawk, not letting a single breath go unnoticed. Such is the life of the rich and famous, under the incessant gaze of journalists and the paparazzi. Lives that many people take a great interest in and admire to the point where others would liken this great interest and admiration to a cult-like worship of celebrities. This is a brief description of what I think to be celebrity culture.

The American paparazzi have been described by celebrities and the news media as scum-of-the-Earth—mean, intrusive scavengers who feast upon other people’s misery (Saltzman par. 4). Imagine taking a walk with your friends in a secluded hiking trail. You are trying to enjoy the peace and serenity that the beautiful day brings; however, as fortune has it, you are a celebrity. Along with your fame come people gazing and staring at you, and fans asking for pictures or autographs. Ultimately, causing a scene wherever you go. Yet today, you found some time alone to enjoy a few moments of solitude, or so you thought. Far off in the distance, you see a determined photographer ready to complete his quest of getting some shots that will turn a nice profit for him. The seconds get shorter and the photographer closes in on his victim: You. His camera flashes in your face and the flickering lights hurt your eyes. The photographer, or more appropriately, the paparazzi was just taking pictures in a public place so were they really breaking any laws? It has been proven that paparazzi tactics of hunting icons have led to trespassing, behavior constituting assault, and invasion of their targeted celebrity’s privacy (McNamura 14). The paparazzi have gotten out of hand, and their antagonistic behavior, intended or not, should be restricted.

Celebrities have a right to have their own privacy, and the paparazzi had better not be allowed to restrict their lives. Furthermore, photographers and journalists must not be permitted to make news that can influence celebrities' success adversely. The rights of celebrities for privacy have always been abused, so they need to defend their rights, despite their profession. Though they are public figures, this does not mean that the publish of every detail of their private lives is justifiable. It is legitimate to take pictures when they are at the stage or on the red carpet, yet most cases they must be left alone. However, the media always inclines to release both sensational and negative news to public. The latest pattern is the Chris Brown and Rihanna domestic abuse scandal ("Chris Brown and Rihanna: A Dangerous Relationship" 1). This really influenced Chris

This time, a woman emerged from the air conditioned lobby of the St. Regis hotel with two small leather bags over her shoulder. One of them contained her dog, Chip. All of a sudden camera flashes surrounded her. She slid into the rear seat of the car. The man accompanying her, put a bulky Wilson tennis bag in the back along with an MCM handbag and a green Whole Foods bag. On a couple of the pictures the paparazzi took, a U.S. Open logo is noticeable on the car.

     Perhaps the best way to think of it is as a war. On one side are the Hollywood stars with their armies of agents, managers, lawyers, publicists, handlers, personal assistants and, of course, bodyguards. And on the other side are the paparazzi - guerrilla warriors armed with cameras, whose job it is to break through the stars’ defenses, steal small parts of their souls and sell them to the highest bidder. The lengths to which paparazzi will go to get “the shot” are legendary - hiding out in trees, digging through garbage and spitting on the stars in order to shoot their reactions. Car chases and helicopter surveillance seem to be routine. And there’s very little the stars can do about it. Even the

Hollywood is filled with paparazzi photographers. They are increasing every year. The “OK” magazine had posted a celebrity weeding for the couples Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas. Some paparazzi photographers had sold it to “OK” magazine. But “Hello” magazine did not like that so they had published an issue featuring pictures of the couple taken in secret in their weeding. Some people agree about what “Hello” magazine said and some of them disagree. The following report presents our recommendation and suggestions about the paparazzi.