[~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

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?

[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. ! !





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!??!

[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.

[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

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

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

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.