Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby librarian_7 » Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:46 am

I've been re-reading this thread, and wanted to add an anecdote that seems related to the subject at hand.

Back in the late 80s/early 90s, I was the PR person for the library where I work. As such, I got to be the photographer at various library events. Once, we had Linda Ellerbee as a guest speaker. (If you don't know of her, she was a reasonably famous journalist and television personality at the time.) She had come to the library event partially because she grew up in the community, before she moved off to New York to seek fame and fortune.

Anyway, in order to get good pictures of the event, and of her interacting with people, etc., I had to pretty much dog her footsteps during the reception. I was trying to be as unobtrusive as possible, but clearly she knew I was lurking around with my camera. I know she knew, because at one point she turned around and said to me, "I'm going in the ladies room. And don't you DARE follow me in there with that camera!"

Well, I was dumbfounded, because of course, I'd never have dreamed of doing anything like that. And I was a bit offended that she'd think I would. I believe I managed to stammer out, "No, ma'am, I wouldn't do such a thing."

Now, my point here is this. I know I wouldn't do that--but she'd never seen me before, and had no frame of reference to know what I might or might not be capable of. I'm sure that worrying about the motives and possible actions of random people, especially random people carrying cameras, is learned behavior. And it's probably something that every celebrity learns.
User avatar
librarian_7
Moonlightaholic Mod
 
Posts: 23481
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:21 pm
Location: wherever Josef is

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby HotMicks » Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:52 am

OMG, she's one of my faves! Iz jealous. :biggrin: Just adored her late, late night news program (Overnight, was it called?).

And sadly, that very thing just happened in my town... to one of the city council members. :sigh:
~ Hot Mick's Mistress of Chill
Image
User avatar
HotMicks
Ancient
 
Posts: 4637
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:32 pm
Location: In the freezer, waitin' for Mick to chill...

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby wpgrace » Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:03 pm

PNWgal wrote:
Lucy wrote:
This is where we have a difference of opinion. Some famous people have done photo shoots and sent the $$ to a personal charity. My respect of Alex's behavior hinges on how he interacts with press and with his fans and his work ethic. If he were to help an Aussie program or the Donor Awareness programs (or any of his past charities) I'd be tickled to support him that way. If he doesn't I still send up good wishes for the health of the child....just curious as heck how beautiful a child he made with his exotic partner!



And my respect of Alex hinges on how he does his job and his public interactions, not how much or little he exposes his family to public scrutiny. I think I've stated before that Alex chose this life. His children did not, and I respect him for trying to shield them from the public as much as he can. I'm kinda happy he chose not to release photos of his new baby - whether or not celebrity baby photo money is donated to charity, I still see it as exploiting those children for money. They can't choose whether or not to have their images out there in the public eye, and as a parent, I'm slightly disgusted celebrities choose to sell their children's photos to the highest bidder.


I actually get why Brangelina sold their baby pics. They are a whole different level of celeb from Alex, and the paps would literally and relentlessly stalk their family, with those loooong lenses, to get the first baby pic. By selling for charity, they headed off some of that behavior. The mystery, at least, was removed.

Alex, fingers crossed, so far is not that level of celeb, and being in Hawaii rather than Pap Central in LA, he has some hope of keeping his family protected. Which is part of why he likes Hawaii so much, I think. So I am glad, too, that he has chosen to keep little Lion to his loved ones and not tried to get attention thru his progeny.

But P is right in that there are plenty of celebs not at the Brangelina level who sell baby pics to the tabloids just so they get THEIR name spread around town. :eyeroll:

And Lucky, Linda Ellerbee did a great news for kids thing on Nickleodeon for years. My daughter grew up with her. Cool you got to meet her. And of course you wouldn't follow her into the toilette!
Image
Banner by redwinter101. I miss you, Beloved.
Awesome avatar by the awesome, clever, and gracious Lilly.

If you read a lot of books you are considered well read. But if you watch a lot of TV, you're not considered well viewed. Lilly Tomlin

Grateful to Alex for Mick, Andy, and McG. :)
User avatar
wpgrace
100% Moonlightaholic
 
Posts: 16427
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby Emerald » Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:08 pm

allegrita wrote:Well, to be honest, I don't think that specific discussion of the behavior of a disturbed individual is relevant here anyway. There's a huge difference between the distribution by "normal" fans of what could be construed as invasive pictures and videos, and the obsessive behavior of a delusional person. Sad to say, being the object of crazy people's obsessions goes with the territory of being an actor. (Just ask Jodie Foster!) :gasp: Alex is by no means alone in this. We can't protect him from people who are truly mentally ill. :sigh: That's what security people are for, and I think he and the 5-0 management have that pretty well covered. What we can do is to respect his wish to be given space in which to live his personal life, especially where his family is concerned. :yes:


Agreed :yes: There are people who take care of that sort of thing, and at the end of the day we can't ever know where certain photos come from or who they were taken by. That's pretty much the reason why I find invasive type pictures of any celebrity so bothersome, we just don't know. I think all we can do is just let the celeb's people do their thing, because they are the ones who are trained to handle this sort of stuff, and think twice about what we, as fans, choose to share. Just my 2 cents worth. :rose:

A quote from Alex's rep - "we appreciate those who respect Alex’s privacy"

I think if we just keep doing that, as fans, of any celebrity, then we're on the right track. :twothumbs:

(again just my opinion)
Image
"Vampires are outside the realms of human constructed notions of sexuality"

I will go down with this ship
And I won't put my hands up and surrender
There will be no white flag above my door
I'm in love and always will be


Queen of the Jock (Josef/Mick) Shippers
User avatar
Emerald
Sire
 
Posts: 3905
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:02 am
Location: In the Slashverse with my boys

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby Fleur de Lisa » Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:17 pm

Lucky--how fortunate you were to meet Linda Ellerbee. She was a fabulous broad---and I mean that in totally complimentary terms.

Your experience reminded me of a story that Whoopi Goldberg has told about a fan wanting her autograph, while she was going to the bathroom. The person literally stuck a pen and piece of paper under the stall!

Just goes to show that it takes all kinds. :eyeroll:

And celebs don't know anything about the kind of people we are, so they don't know whether we are decent people or weirdos--or even worse-- when we approach them. Imagine that while they are out and about with kids. No wonder so many actors have slugged paparazzo when they have been approached while out with their families.

I honestly wish there was some law protecting the kids. We leave the President's kids alone, there should be laws on the books that say that if you are under 18 and not consenting to be photographed, you are hands off.
User avatar
Fleur de Lisa
100% Moonlightaholic
 
Posts: 15867
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:42 pm
Location: I wish I may, I wish I might, have the gorgeous man on the right>

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby wpgrace » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:18 pm

Tho the Prez's kids have Guys with Guns to insure their security, which is probably all that secures it, as the press has lost its manners. Lord we know all there is to know about Suri Cruise...

I have been totes confounded by that. I don't enjoy Tom Cruise or Katie Whoever, so not sure...
Is Suri's grotesque exposure due to THEM putting her out there, or the paps?

I totes admire Alex for his family first behavior. The temptation, by agents and the press, to get your kid out there must be fierce, but he kept Saxon protected and seems I tent on doing so with little Lion too. Good luck, buddy! :wave:
Image
Banner by redwinter101. I miss you, Beloved.
Awesome avatar by the awesome, clever, and gracious Lilly.

If you read a lot of books you are considered well read. But if you watch a lot of TV, you're not considered well viewed. Lilly Tomlin

Grateful to Alex for Mick, Andy, and McG. :)
User avatar
wpgrace
100% Moonlightaholic
 
Posts: 16427
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: Request for Member Discussion: What is too invasive?

Postby nutmegger911 » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:48 pm

wpgrace wrote:Tho the Prez's kids have Guys with Guns to insure their security, which is probably all that secures it, as the press has lost its manners. Lord we know all there is to know about Suri Cruise...


ITA Grace - That is the only reason those kids aren't hounded, photographed, kidnapped, whatever. When it comes to the prez's kids, the paparazzi must have a sense that if they start shooting someone might just shoot back.


Fleur de Lisa wrote:Your experience reminded me of a story that Whoopi Goldberg has told about a fan wanting her autograph, while she was going to the bathroom. The person literally stuck a pen and piece of paper under the stall!

Wow! :gasp: I get the "this-will-probably-be-my-only-chance-to-meet *insert name here*" sense of urgency that inspires folks to introduce themselves and/or ask for photo/autograph, but that's one way to insure it will be the last chance you get.


I heard a story once that Frank Sinatra took care of one particularly annoying papparazo by hiring someone else to give the guy his own treatment, stalking him so agressively as to prevent him from doing his "job" - right down to jumping out of bushes and shoving a clicking camara into the surprised pap's face. I don't know if it's true, but it sure sounds like the type of story often attributed to Ole Blue Eyes.
NM911
Image
LIVE WIDE
It ain't canon until they've shot it (and aired it) - I said that.
Trust the Muse. - Catmoon
The system isn't broken, it's fixed. - Billo
User avatar
nutmegger911
Cleaner
 
Posts: 6074
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Right here - right now

Previous

Return to General Forum Guidelines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest