Gossip site to censor paparazzi

[~Kizwiz~]

Gossip site to censor paparazzi

UK showbusinesss gossip website Holy Moly has announced it is to self-censor paparazzi shots of celebrities.
The decision was sparked by "unease" over the treatment of celebrities such as Britney Spears and Amy Winehouse.

A statement on the Holy Moly site said there had been a "definite change in the perception of paparazzi pictures".

It will no longer publish photos of stars being chased or in "distress", while photos of celebrities with their children will also be banned.

'Seedy' photos

However, photographs of celebrities at press launches and premieres and "idiots who go to places like The Ivy" will continue to be included on the site.

Speaking to the Guardian, Holy Moly's creator - who prefers to remain anonymous - said he believes there has been a sea-change in people's attitudes to press intrusion.

"Both reader and the publisher alike are getting a bit uneasy about it all when you can clearly see two or three people have been driven to the brink of mental illness because of it," he said.

"It's not funny any more and to get any sort of pleasure out of it feels a bit seedy. For me it was when Britney came out of rehab, that was the one that really worried me."

Last month British photographer Nick Stern resigned from the Los Angeles-based photo agency Splash Pictures in protest at the paparazzi's "aggressive" pursuit of Spears.

"Directly or indirectly, Britney is going to come to some horrific end, or a member of the public will," he said.

"It's not unusual to have 20 or 30 cars pursuing her at any one time. It's become acceptable to drive at 80mph down the wrong side of the street into oncoming traffic."

Holy Moly said Stern's decision, along with fans' comments, had influenced its decision.

"When one of the biggest names in paparazzi jacks it in due to ethics and morals and the world's biggest pop star gets her knickers photographed by 30 people an hour after being released from a mental institute, you know there's a problem on the shop floor."



BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7241563.stm)

Thank god someone has taken the first step. This has got to be a step forward for the best

[Xander]

At last somebody care about the welfare of celebrities. It so unfair on the celebs when all they want is not to be chased by papparazti.

[~Kizwiz~]

To be fair, some celebs do court the media when they want to press but then claim the 'want to be alone' but there have been instances when its not right for the press especially when they are spiraling out of control and the media are chasing them just for a photo

[Shaun]

The paparazzi are vultures. Seriously, nobody should have to endure the stalking, and let's face it, it is stalking, which IS against the law, that the likes of Britney Spears suffer.

I don't care if you say they "court" the paparazzi; it should be illegal. Then again, they shouldn't be in a job feeding the gossip-addictions possessed by the masses, but...life's a bitch.

[James]

Speaking to the Guardian, Holy Moly's creator - who prefers to remain anonymous - said he believes there has been a sea-change in people's attitudes to press intrusion.



That's a bit ironic, isn't it? :whistle:

[Sunny_01]

I think this is a step in the right direction.

Ok so some do court the press BUT that does not mean they ask to have every second of their personal lives invaded. I have felt sick to th pits of my stomach at some of the things printed of Britney over the past weeks. That girl is in obvious distress and in a state of mental breakdown yet they still hound her. How long will it be before someone is seriously hurt or killed in the pursuit of a Britney having a mad moment photo.

[ThisIsMarie]

The decision was sparked by "unease" over the treatment of celebrities such as Britney Spears and Amy Winehouse. Amy Winehouse!?! Doesn't even come close to the way they have treated Britney!!

"It's not funny any more and to get any sort of pleasure out of it feels a bit seedy. For me it was when Britney came out of rehab, that was the one that really worried me." When exactly was it funny!


"Directly or indirectly, Britney is going to come to some horrific end, or a member of the public will," I hope not. :sad: ! !





It's obviously good that they aren't doing those kind of photo's any more but the madness isn't going to stop untill something far more radical is done.

Seriously how are these *****ing paparazzi's aloud to treat people like this!??! :mad:

[Mrluvaluva]

It's about time! People like Britney or Amy cannot step outside their homes without being photographed. Just going to the local store is impossible. On days when there is nothing to report on Amy Winehouse (which is very rare), they will photograph her buying stuff from a shop. Is that news? Do we need to know about that? No we don't, but the publics obsession with celeb, creates a market for this trash. If we didn't buy the magazines and papers that parade these photos, then maybe this would be a step forward too in erradicating this kind of behaviour.

Companies pay vast amounts of money for photos of celebes like Britney also. If they followed in the footsteps of Holy Moly, then the demand would not be so great, and the prices of pictures of this nature would come tumbling down, creating less interest.

They are also talking about bringing in a new law where the paps are not allowed to get up close and in their faces. (I think Kiz did a thread on this also). This is another way of moving forward too. What will it take before something is done? Will someone die in an accident? Will someone be driven to suicide?

Something needs doing and it needs doing now.

[Sunny_01]

Well said Baz I totally agree with you. Things have just gone to far now, celebs can not even put the bin out without getting their photo snapped.

[Xander]

I dont have respect for the celebs who clearly seek paparazzi for attention and too boost there status.
I would hate to walk out the door at there being a crowd of paps taking pics and following me everywhere i go.

[GiRTh]

I dont agree with this kind of censorship. Celebrities like Jordan live their lives in the press surely the public have a right to see the negative side of them. Censorship may mean that celebs can flout the press, get paid vast sums of money for dodgy but official stories. What about the freedom of the press and the right to freedom of expression?

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh
I dont agree with this kind of censorship. Celebrities like Jordan live their lives in the press surely the public have a right to see the negative side of them. Censorship may mean that celebs can flout the press, get paid vast sums of money for dodgy but official stories. What about the freedom of the press and the right to freedom of expression?

To a certain extent yes. If they choose to be in the limelight, then they have to expect to be snapped by photographers wherever they go, but there are limits. Britney was being photographed being put into an ambulance and being taken away in a distressed state. As soon as she left the hospital, they were waiting for her like vultures. Don't you think at certain times they should be let be?

I also don't agree with entourages of 20-30 cars driving erratically on the wrong side of the road for instance. That is just dangerous. If any of us did it, we would be fined or worse. And, behaviour like this could kill someone.

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
To a certain extent yes. If they choose to be in the limelight, then they have to expect to be snapped by photographers wherever they go, but there are limits. Britney was being photographed being put into an ambulance and being taken away in a distressed state. As soon as she left the hospital, they were waiting for her like vultures. Don't you think at certain times they should be let be? No. If they let the press in they deserve what they get. They cannot expect the press to turn the cameras on and off when the celebs tell them to. That would be extremely naive by any celebrity to ever expect that. If the celebs demand a certain amount of privacy, from what I've seen, the press will give it to them.

[Jack]

This story features on Richard & Judy at 5.25. :thumbs:

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh
No. If they let the press in they deserve what they get. They cannot expect the press to turn the cameras on and off when the celebs tell them to. That would be extremely naive by any celebrity to ever expect that. If the celebs demand a certain amount of privacy, from what I've seen, the press will give it to them.

What? So nobody is allowed any privacy any more? Say you are a movie star. You are doing a job as an actor. Why should it have to be a 24/7 job?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
What? So nobody is allowed any privacy any more? Say you are a movie star. You are doing a job as an actor. Why should it have to be a 24/7 job? I'm not saying that. I've seen loads of documentaries on the paps and one thing that is common to all is that they only stalk celebs that they feel deserve it. They love celebs who take the time to pose for a picture in the street. The celebs who keep the paps happy tend to have a good relationship with them. For instance, when Victoria Beckham was in still in England all the pictures you used to see of her out and about in the street were all taken by the same man. That, to me, is a very clever way of giving the paps the pictures they want but on the celebs terms. Celebs like Britney who use the press when they feel like it but want to shy away also when they feel like it will never get what they want.

[Lauren]

Personally, I am glad. Though I agree with GiRTh in that we should see the negative side to a celebs life - actively persuing them to push them into mental illness in order to get a 2-page-spread is taking the freedom thing too far.

Celebrities use paps the way they want them, and paps use Celebrities the way they want them. Thats a healthy relationship - however, when Celebrities literally can not escape the glare CONSTANTLY - it's harassment and many people are jailed over things not half as bad.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh
I'm not saying that. I've seen loads of documentaries on the paps and one thing that is common to all is that they only stalk celebs that they feel deserve it. They love celebs who take the time to pose for a picture in the street. The celebs who keep the paps happy tend to have a good relationship with them. For instance, when Victoria Beckham was in still in England all the pictures you used to see of her out and about in the street were all taken by the same man. That, to me, is a very clever way of giving the paps the pictures they want but on the celebs terms. Celebs like Britney who use the press when they feel like it but want to shy away also when they feel like it will never get what they want.

So has Britney "deserved" all this attention from the paps? Does she "deserve" to be hounded by a motorcade of paps whenever she leaves the house?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
So has Britney "deserved" all this attention from the paps? Does she "deserve" to be hounded by a motorcade of paps whenever she leaves the house? Up to a certain extent yes. Obviously its no fun watching someone have a nervous breakdown but there's no doubt she has lived her life in the press. Brtiney has done many stupid things over the past few years that she makes us feel there's always a story surrounding her. The press have taken advantage of that. Obviuosly, they're now going too far but Britney initially invited them in.

I dont like this kind of censorship because it sets a bad prescedent for the freedom of the press. These celebs are cynical media savvy people who will manipulate the new controls to their advantage. A true media *****, like Jordan, will have a field day if there were more controls.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh
Obviuosly, they're now going too far but Britney initially invited them in.

So you agree they are going too far, yet you do not like this kind of censorship. What do you think the solution is then?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRTh
Obviuosly, they're now going too far but Britney initially invited them in.

So you agree they are going too far, yet you do not like this kind of censorship. What do you think the solution is then? The solution is for the celebs to be less obsessed with themselves and not live their attention seeking lives in the press. It's really quite simple. I mentioned Victoria Beckham before. She may be a media ***** but she's very good at controlling the press around her. Britney should take a leaf out of her book.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh
The solution is for the celebs to be less obsessed with themselves and not live their attention seeking lives in the press. It's really quite simple.

How can that happen when they follow her everywhere, and she can't even leave the house as they lye in wait for her?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRTh
The solution is for the celebs to be less obsessed with themselves and not live their attention seeking lives in the press. It's really quite simple.

How can that happen when they follow her everywhere, and she can't even leave the house as they lye in wait for her? I've already explained. She invited them in and she cannot expect the cameras to roll only when she wants them to. It's a sad situation but it is what it is.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRThI've already explained. She invited them in and she cannot expect the cameras to roll only when she wants them to. It's a sad situation but it is what it is.

So basically you are saying that she has made her bed, and now she must lye in it?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRThI've already explained. She invited them in and she cannot expect the cameras to roll only when she wants them to. It's a sad situation but it is what it is.

So basically you are saying that she has made her bed, and now she must lye in it? Yes. Some celebs seem to have bit more to them when it comes to dealing with the press. For instance, Christina Aguilera is about to have a baby yet many people would hardly know. Unlike Britney who posed nude when she was pregnant. Do you see the diofference? The celebs can control the press if they want. Dont ever believe otherwise.

[Sunny_01]

I see and agree with both sides of the argument here to some extent. Those that flirt with the press and invite them in do ask to be followed everywhere, BUT at what point do they draw the line is what I wonder? When do they stop to think about the harm they are doing? I know as a human being I would not like to be involved in harming someone for the sake of a photo. The other thing is Britney is a young unstable girl and was brought into the media spotlight at a young age. She has made mistakes yes I agree but to make her suffer the misery she is now just seems wrong/

Some celebs manage to paps so well that you have to hold them up as examples of how to deal with things. The celebs you mentioned Girth are all good ones. Even when Becks was caught with that Loos' woman Victoria was able to turn things to her advantage. Sometimes saying nothing is the best course of action.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh

Christina Aguilera is about to have a baby yet many people would hardly know. Unlike Britney who posed nude when she was pregnant. Do you see the diofference?

Erm....

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s233/BGRAYSHON/5-64.jpg

Obviously not!

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Sunny_01

BUT at what point do they draw the line is what I wonder? When do they stop to think about the harm they are doing?

Exactly my point. They seem to have no moral code and get away with too much. Something has to be done before it is too late. At what point do they stop?

[GiRTh]

How do you propose it change when you have people like Jordan selling stories on how one of her children hits her and injures her. She's making her self look a victim at the expense of her own son. Where do you draw the line with scum like that? Britney was happy to pose nude while pregnant, go out with no knickers on and flash her bits everywhere, marry that ****** in Vegas and them have it annulled. Where do you think she wants the line to be drawn? When you find that out then you will know how to regulate the paps.

[Mrluvaluva]

I just think that especially when people are sick, they should be left alone.

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRTh

Christina Aguilera is about to have a baby yet many people would hardly know. Unlike Britney who posed nude when she was pregnant. Do you see the diofference?

Erm....

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s233/BGRAYSHON/5-64.jpg

Obviously not! You got me with that one. I dont seem to be able to find any others though.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh

You got me with that one. I dont seem to be able to find any others though.

pwned

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRTh

You got me with that one. I dont seem to be able to find any others though.

pwned :puzzled:

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh

pwned :puzzled: [/quote]

pwned

A corruption of the word "Owned." This originated in an online game called Warcraft, where a map designer misspelled "owned." When the computer beat a player, it was supposed to say, so-and-so "has been owned."

Instead, it said, so-and-so "has been pwned."

It basically means "to own" or to be dominated by an opponent or situation, especially by some god-like or computer-like force.
"Man, I rock at my job, but I still got a bad evaluation. I was pwned."

OR

"That team totally pwned us."

Get with the times G!

[GiRTh]

If you say so mate. I suppose you have to take every victory you can get. Strange but I think you're yet to prove your point just about every poster can see what I'm saying. Anyway, off topic.

Why dont you ask Britney where the line should be drawn? When she tells the press how much attention she wants then they may treat her a bit better.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh
If you say so mate. I suppose you have to take every victory you can get. Strange but I think you're yet to prove your point just about every poster can see what I'm saying.

It's nothing to do with getting a victory. It was a joke. It's not about scoring points. I thought we were having a discussion?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRTh
If you say so mate. I suppose you have to take every victory you can get. Strange but I think you're yet to prove your point just about every poster can see what I'm saying.

It's nothing to do with getting a victory. It was a joke. It's not about scoring points. I thought we were having a discussion? We were. And still are. Whats up?

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by GiRTh

We were. And still are. Whats up?

Nothing. Just pointing that out.

Anyway, do you really think the paps would lay off Britney a bit if she "had talks" with them?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Originally posted by GiRTh

We were. And still are. Whats up?

Nothing. Just pointing that out.

Anyway, do you really think the paps would lay off Britney a bit if she "had talks" with them? Not really. She's set the bar for them and she's got to live with it. She shouldn't marry inappropriate men while p*ssed up, flash her bits in public etc. It alls adds up to the perception that wherever Britney is a story will follow shortly.

[Ruth]

For what it's worth....

the best way to stop news stories like the ones about Britney, Amy et al, would be for people to stop buying rubbish like Heat, Closer, Now, Reveal, etc., etc., and stop buying into that kind of rubbish. If there was no demand for it, they wouldn't be supplying it.

In the case of Britney, I have to say, I found some of the recent footage of her distressing. However, the press is only so interested in Britney because she has gone out of her way to make sure that they are interested in her throughout her career.

There are so many genuine superstars out there, who hardly ever get papped. The press leave them alone because they don't court the press. I used the example of Johnny Depp in another post, but I'll use it again here. He is a massive star, with a huge fanbase. Yet, you hardly ever see pictures of him - because he doesn't go out of his way to get himself noticed. There was no big fuss when his daughter was ill in hospital last year. He spent his time at her bedside (and he didn't publicise the fact that after she recovered, he visited the hospital dressed as Captain Jack Sparrow and spent four hours at the hospital reading bedtime stories to other children who were patients).

You can bet that if that was Britney, Kerry Katona or Jordan - not only would there have been huge headlines all over Heat about the fact that their child was ill, but they would have also found time to squeeze in a few interviews, only to do an 'exclusive' interview with OK when the child had recovered (maybe not Britney, but KK or Jordan certainly would have done).

If the press backed off Britney and took no notice of her, I doubt she would be happy with that either.

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Ruth
If the press backed off Britney and took no notice of her, I doubt she would be happy with that either. Absolutely. As usual, Ruth keeps it real.

PS: Nice to have you back darlin'.

[Ruth]

Nice to be back, honey:wink:

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Ruth
Nice to be back, honey:wink: Please stay.:hug:

[~Kizwiz~]

I really dont know where I stand on this one. Britney is clearly suffering mentally and I firmly believe she needs to stay away until she sorts herself out. Its the only way she is going to cope with her distressing life.

However, I also see where G is coming from. She did court the press and has manipulated them for her own person gain and success. I happened to be channel hopping the other night and caught a program on her where the papz where following her (as usual) and she hopped out of her car and stripped down to her bra and knickers and when for a dip in the sea while being photographed. She knew what she was doing and I found that pretty low to be honest.

You cannot bite the hand that feeds you. If you allow the press into 'that much' of your life you have to roll with the punches.

However, I dont believe that a celeb should be hounded and followed at speed...like diana!

[GiRTh]

I agree Kiz. I'm not completely heartless but I dont have anywhere near as much sympathy as Baz.

Britney has used the media when she wanted to and been very happy to do so. As I stated earlier, someone needs to ask HER how much publicity is too much publicity.

[Mrluvaluva]

The whole point to this thread was about censoring pics of celebs in distress etc. I agree with this and I think you all do too. Britney has done some pretty low things in her life to be in the media spotlight and courts the press. This we are all aware of. The point is that I do not think there should be motorcades of paps following her to the hospital and taking photos of her in the ambulance. That is the whole point to this I am trying to make. Anyone disagree?

[Ruth]

For sheer safety, I wish that the paps wouldn't chase vehicles through the streets.

As I said before, the best way to stop these sorts of pictures from appearing would be for everyone to stop buying mags with them in. There's only a supply because there's a demand. Why people are that interested in Britney, I don't know. It's not pleasant to see some of the images of her that have been shown lately. I switch over the channel when it comes on the news, and I never buy Heat and magazines of that ilk.

All in all though, I am against censorship of anything that is not illegal, so as unpleasant as these images are, I don't believe they should be censored.

Of course, the gossip site that it censoring the paps is only doing it on their own site as far as I'm aware, which is fair enough. If enough sites did this, the demand would die down.

[Ruth]

Incidentally, I've just had a look at holymoly out of interest (I'd never even heard of the site before this thread), and they've got a pretty nasty article about Britney on there right now.

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
The whole point to this thread was about censoring pics of celebs in distress etc. I agree with this and I think you all do too. Britney has done some pretty low things in her life to be in the media spotlight and courts the press. This we are all aware of. The point is that I do not think there should be motorcades of paps following her to the hospital and taking photos of her in the ambulance. That is the whole point to this I am trying to make. Anyone disagree? I do. I'd like to see a few pictures of Jordan in distress. She definitely deserves some unwanted press intrusion.

I think we'll all agree that motorcades of paps following a celebrity is over the top but thats not what this thread is about either. I think this censorhips will be yet a furhter step toward the press mollycoddlng celebrities. Lets see these celebs with warts and all.