To pry into celebrity's lives suggests they should be saintly at all times. Fair?

Let me first start by saying this: celebrities do not owe us, the public nor press, anything. To “expect intrusions” suggests that it is natural and therefore justified to have the press interrupt any aspect of their lives as they see fit.

We now live in a culture where privacy can be bought - and somehow simply being on TV gives the viewer the entitlement of voyeurism into a celebrity’s personal life.

This should not be the case. Without sounding Hollywood dramatic, actors are people too. What goes on in their personal lives, which includes realms of family, relationships and home life, is for them to keep and to share as and when they wish. I am sure that nowhere in their job titles does it say that they should be subjected to daily scrutiny by the papz.

Article continues below...
More stories you may like...
Wear the scent of vulnerability
On Watching Educating Yorkshire
Reality TV merry-go-round shows no sign of halting after Big Brother 2013 launch

To pry into their lives, criticise them, highlighting their failures and shortcomings, suggests that celebrities should uphold perfect lifestyles that are far superior and saintlier than us mere commoners. The sense of entitled voyeurism assumes that we are interested in them far beyond for their work and that our own lives just aren’t interesting enough.

Of course there are those that like, thrive off, and even chase after the media attention but that group of celebrities (as I am sure we can all think of a few) can continue acting for the camera and leave the others to lead more normal, healthier lives away from the press. In recent times we have seen the passing of talented screen actors whom buckled under the pressure of stardom.

Some may argue that it is hypocritical for famous people to be using photoshoots and interviews to further their careers whilst at the same time shying away from those same cameras when their fans want just want to know more about them personally. What those critics call hypocritical I call drawing a line between business and home time.

I do recognise that the press depend on this level of intrusionin order to sell papers, but it doesn’t have to be this way. I am sure the journalists at tabloid newspapers can write better stories than “X shows off super trim bikini body in a pair of short shorts”. The press needs to look beyond the money and understand that celebrities aren’t simply pawns of the entertainment industry.

Do you agree? Read the other half of the argument here.

To pry into celebrity's lives suggests they should be saintly at all times. Fair?

You might also like...

People who read this also read...