[ionia23]

Thought this would make a nice derailment from some of the political debates we've had recently.

Celeb wins privacy suit

Most interesting is the retort from the Daily Mirror.

So that's the big question: If you're a public figure, are you entitled to any privacy whatsoever?  Where are the boundaries between a free press and the right to go buy a hotdog at a convenience store without being hounded by photographers?

or playing with your kids on the beach?

[phreak]

maybe we should be looking into why people care about the lives of celebrities

[ionia23]

Originally posted by PhReAk
maybe we should be looking into why people care about the lives of celebrities

[Rictor]

Originally posted by PhReAk
maybe we should be looking into why people care about the lives of celebrities

Amen to that. Its pathetic is what it is.

but as for privacy, sure give them as much privacy as they want. I mean, of course you expect there to be cameras at a movie premiere or something along those lines, but I'm of the opinion that the paparazzi needs to stay the hell out of their personal lives.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Rictor


Amen to that. Its pathetic is what it is.

but as for privacy, sure give them as much privacy as they want. I mean, of course you expect there to be cameras at a movie premiere or something along those lines, but I'm of the opinion that the paparazzi needs to stay the hell out of their personal lives.

Yeah, but they get to cry "free press" at will.  Stinks.

[SadisticSid]

Give them as much privacy as the law entitles them to and no more. I hate our celebrity-centric gossip culture as much as anyone, but banning paparazzi and giving them special protection is not the way to demolish it.

[Fineus]

I gotta go with Phreak myself, the average human part of me might flash an interest in events but I really don't give a **** in a genuine way. It's a pity so many do.

As for actual privacy... no more than anyone else deserves. No less either. They're only people.

[Thorn]

Freedom of Press/Speech comes second to Freedom of Privacy.
Anyone who says otherwise is a miserable **** who has nothing beter to do with their life than interfere in the affairs of others.

[Rictor]

Not really Thorn. I mean, if **** was doing coke (oh, wait...) the press would have a right (and an obligation, but they obviously don't know the meaning of the word) to report it without the **** family crying privacy.

It depends on the importance of the matter. If its just some random celeb going through rehab, who cares. But if its an important person with decision making powers, than their personal actions may be important. Clinton getting a blowjob, no one gives a ****, since it doesn't interfere with his decison making as the POTUS. But if he was taking bribes from the Russians, that would be important.

[SadisticSid]

Originally posted by Rictor
It depends on the importance of the matter. If its just some random celeb going through rehab, who cares. But if its an important person with decision making powers, than their personal actions may be important. Clinton getting a blowjob, no one gives a ****, since it doesn't interfere with his decison making as the POTUS. But if he was taking bribes from the Russians, that would be important.

And this is why what Thorn was saying will never (or at best, very rarely) happen. Clinton getting a blowjob might imply things about his presiding over the US, which will be important to some people. If you make a decision based on what can be printed by what's deemed to be important, anyone can make up anything to justify it....

[Cabbie]

Originally posted by PhReAk
maybe we should be looking into why people care about the lives of celebrities

Well said. Sadly these very people are the reason why the media hounds celebreties, becuase it's profitable - the fangirls/fanboys simply buy it all up.

[IceFire]

Privacy is important...public figure or not.  These people are harrased way too much.

[mikhael]

I'm with IceFire. My rights end where theirs begins. I have no business knowing what these people do outside of the spotlight.  Only when they are performing in their public roles should we expect access to them. Its a simple matter of treating others as you want to be treated. I don't want to be photographed on the street going about my private business. Likewise, I shouldn't expect to get to do that to a celebrity (nor should intrusive papparazzi be able to profit from it).

[an0n]

When I rule the world/country it will be impossible to get a job in the cabinet without giving me or Bubba a blowjob.

Hot chicks would blow me; Ugly chicks and men would blow Bubba. That way, if they pissed me off, I'd have video of them sucking on a black man's wang.

[JarC]

man, talk about bending logic....

"Morgan said in court that the newspaper had reported Campbell's drug problem sympathetically. He argued that she was not entitled to the same privacy as ordinary people because she used the media to promote her image and to discuss intimate details of her private life."

that is almost the same as saying that you are not allowed to ask money for software if you at any point distributed freeware in the past...

[ionia23]

Originally posted by JarC
man, talk about bending logic....

"Morgan said in court that the newspaper had reported Campbell's drug problem sympathetically. He argued that she was not entitled to the same privacy as ordinary people because she used the media to promote her image and to discuss intimate details of her private life."

that is almost the same as saying that you are not allowed to ask money for software if you at any point distributed freeware in the past...

See, what he was really saying is that "celebrities falling from grace sells.  Ruining one is far more profitable than building one up."

[J3Vr6]

Sure it's their business, but you can't say it's not fun seeing a gary busey cracking a camera guys head open... Or bjork knocking out a reporter.  It's none of our business, but it's always fun to see someone get a beat down, whether it be from a famous guy or not.

[01010]

Piers Morgan is a wanker. I hope the photos of th British Soldiers torturing prisoners are fake for two reasons.

1) It's a ****ing disgrace if it did happen

2) If their fake Piers Morgan will be sued for every god damn penny he owns and nothing would make me happier.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by J3Vr6
Sure it's their business, but you can't say it's not fun seeing a gary busey cracking a camera guys head open... Or bjork knocking out a reporter.  It's none of our business, but it's always fun to see someone get a beat down, whether it be from a famous guy or not.

I disagree. I don't like seeing people get beat down, except in fiction.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by J3Vr6
Sure it's their business, but you can't say it's not fun seeing a gary busey cracking a camera guys head open... Or bjork knocking out a reporter.  It's none of our business, but it's always fun to see someone get a beat down, whether it be from a famous guy or not.

I've seen that clip of Bjork.  That reporter pushed her to the limits.  She's usually level-headed about that, but when you intrude on her kid....I'd be levelling small nations too.