Paparazzi Opinion Essay

  • Paparazzi shouldn't invade.

    They shouldn't be banned, but they should be as minimal as possible. There should be federal and state laws in place. They should all have to be professionals, mature, understanding, and ethical. They should be required to have permits and licenses to shoot. The permits should have to specify, in advance, who the picture is being taken of, where it will be taken, if they have the person who the picture is being taken of's consent and approval, when it will be taken, etc. Like how a contractor needs a permit, a driver needs a license/permit, or a police officer needs a warrant, photographers should need these kind of things. If these rules are broken, there should be consequences. They should not be able to get away with indirectly killing anyone, for example Princess Diana. The driver in the Princess Diana case shouldn't be a scapegoat. The corrupt Paparazzi should be held responsible. They people getting there picture taken should have full control over what can go public, as long as they aren't covering up any illegal actions. America, please, let us to something great again! Thank you.

  • Paparazzies should be arrested

    If someone was fallowing me, taking pictures of me and bullying me everyday single day, I would instantly report them to the police and they would without a doubt get the stalkers arrested for harrasing me, and I would get a restraining order against them. But if a celebrity call the cops saying that there is someone following them and harrasing them, no one is willing to protect them, because they are not able to stop the paparazzi for good. It's like all celebs are being punished for being rich and successful. Nobody deserves that! That's simply perverse! It doesn't matter if it is a lot of work, the law is the law. It shouldn't be legal to stalk, it can be extremely damaging! If someone feels threatened they should be taken serious no matter who they are..

  • Paparazzi should not be aloud.

    For the sake of the celebrities private and social life, paparazzi should be banned. Think about princess Diana, that her death was the cause of the paparazzi, no seat belt on, trying to escape the powerful army of the paparazzi. Think about it. Do you suppose that is ok? Of course not.

  • There is a high demand

    Everyone wants to know if Brangelina are going to be married soon or if Madonna had any recent plastic surgery. The world’s appetite for ground breaking news such as these examples is insatiable and fill countless magazines every week. These magazine companies need celebrity content to produce their journals and the only way they are going to get that is from paparazzi. If we ban Paparazzi there will be no celebrity content and if there is no celebrity content there will be no content for magazines. We cannot produce magazines if we don’t have paparazzi giving us the photos we crave. No magazines, means no money for everyone associated with the magazine industry.

  • In a public space, they have the right to take photos, whether it is for their job or entertainment!

    So many people rely on the paparazzi industry. The editors, journalists, fashion advisors and celebrities play their parts in the much loved gossip and celebrity magazines. Without paparazzi these people would be unemployed and the celebrities would have to try and find another way to get publicity. The magazines are part of our culture and most of the celebrities don't mind being photographed, its what they signed up for and they often want the publicity. Paparazzi take photos in public places and that is there right.

  • In a public space, they have the right to take photos, whether it is for their job or entertainment!

    So many people rely on the paparazzi industry. The editors, journalists, fashion advisors and celebrities play their parts in the much loved gossip and celebrity magazines. Without paparazzi these people would be unemployed and the celebrities would have to try and find another way to get publicity. The magazines are part of our culture and most of the celebrities don't mind being photographed, its what they signed up for and they often want the publicity. Paparazzi take photos in public places and that is there right.

  • No they shouldn't

    There are already many laws that exist that we can use to help regulate the problems celebrities face with the paparazzi. It is Illegal for the paparazzi, like any other person, to trespass. Therefore the paparazzi are not allowed to enter private property without the permission of the owners. This would limit them from taking photos of celebrities in their houses, backyards and at any other venues which have restricted access for the public. It can also be argued as a consequence of this that the paparazzi can also be restricted from taking a photo of a celebrity whilst the celebrity is on private property from an adjoining property. When a photo was taken of Kate Middleton, sunbaking topless, whilst on private property by a photographer with a long lens in a neighbouring yard, the court ruled in favour of Kate and had the photo withdrawn from circulation. The paparazzi are also not allowed to harass or stalk famous people. In the unlikely case that they do most celebrities have a form of security protecting them. The High Court in the UK has in a few instances enforced the anti-stalking laws, for example One Direction Singer Harry Styles won a case against a particular group of paparazzi. This group was banned from pursuing him in the street or waiting outside his house. Other everyday laws that the paparazzi must also abide by all the usual road rules. The photographer who intentionally drove into Lindsay Lohans car in the United States in order to get a photo should be charged with reckless driving. Paparazzi who pursue celebrities in cars or on motorbikes, still need to abide by the road rules. The police can pull over and charge them with speeding and dangerous driving if they are in fact breaking these laws. If the police enforce these road rules better then accidents such as the tragic one that claimed the life of Princess Diana may have been avoided. It should now be clear that the Paparazzi should not be banned as there are already other laws in place which can be used to regulate their behaviour.
    In order to prevent incidents that can be caused by Paparazzi, we should introduce new laws that protect the celebrity’s rights and wellbeing. For example, a celebrity should have the right to not allow a picture to be exposed to the media. This way the stories in our magazines are not just a biased inference that is affecting the celebrity. Magazines should be made to obtain written consent from the celebrity to use photos of them, this would avoid court cases like the one that Kate Middleton had after the photos of her sunbaking on vacation were published in a French magazine. Kate deserves the right to see the photos before they are made public. The paparazzi should not be allowed to take pictures of celebrities who are in a vulnerable situation. Simpler rules could also be put in place.

  • No they shouldn't

    There are already many laws that exist that we can use to help regulate the problems celebrities face with the paparazzi. It is Illegal for the paparazzi, like any other person, to trespass. Therefore the paparazzi are not allowed to enter private property without the permission of the owners. This would limit them from taking photos of celebrities in their houses, backyards and at any other venues which have restricted access for the public. It can also be argued as a consequence of this that the paparazzi can also be restricted from taking a photo of a celebrity whilst the celebrity is on private property from an adjoining property. When a photo was taken of Kate Middleton, sunbaking topless, whilst on private property by a photographer with a long lens in a neighbouring yard, the court ruled in favour of Kate and had the photo withdrawn from circulation. The paparazzi are also not allowed to harass or stalk famous people. In the unlikely case that they do most celebrities have a form of security protecting them. The High Court in the UK has in a few instances enforced the anti-stalking laws, for example One Direction Singer Harry Styles won a case against a particular group of paparazzi. This group was banned from pursuing him in the street or waiting outside his house. Other everyday laws that the paparazzi must also abide by all the usual road rules. The photographer who intentionally drove into Lindsay Lohans car in the United States in order to get a photo should be charged with reckless driving. Paparazzi who pursue celebrities in cars or on motorbikes, still need to abide by the road rules. The police can pull over and charge them with speeding and dangerous driving if they are in fact breaking these laws. If the police enforce these road rules better then accidents such as the tragic one that claimed the life of Princess Diana may have been avoided. It should now be clear that the Paparazzi should not be banned as there are already other laws in place which can be used to regulate their behaviour.
    In order to prevent incidents that can be caused by Paparazzi, we should introduce new laws that protect the celebrity’s rights and wellbeing. For example, a celebrity should have the right to not allow a picture to be exposed to the media. This way the stories in our magazines are not just a biased inference that is affecting the celebrity. Magazines should be made to obtain written consent from the celebrity to use photos of them, this would avoid court cases like the one that Kate Middleton had after the photos of her sunbaking on vacation were published in a French magazine. Kate deserves the right to see the photos before they are made public. The paparazzi should not be allowed to take pictures of celebrities who are in a vulnerable situation. Simpler rules could also be put in place.

  • I do not think the paparazzi should be banned.

    I do not think the paparazzi should be banned. I do however think there should be some sorts of regulation on what they are allowed to do. It is ridiculous that they stand around trying to catch celebrities coming out of their own homes. I guess our culture is partially to blame too though, because there are so many mindless drones who consume the drivel that the paparazzi puts out.

  • No, they have a place in society.

    No, the paparazzi should not be banned, because they serve a place in society for those who are interested. The paparazzi have found a way to make an honest living by taking photographs. There is nothing wrong with that. Occasionally, they invade privacy, but that should be handled on a case by case basis.

  • Our society is obsessed with celebrities. This obsession has turned what most photojournalist would consider off limits and into photojournalists who are maniacs, paparazzi. The word paparazzi, comes from the word "paparazzo", which is Italian for annoying insect. Paparazzi are self-employed freelance photographers who sell their pictures for large amounts of money. These photographers have no respect for the moral and ethical values in photography, and they have earned this title. Some photographers and reporters will go to any means, even illegal actions, to get a picture or story.

    However, public figures are human beings like everyone else, and the media should give them the right to privacy. The media needs to operate with more respect for both laws and for moral and ethical codes of conduct. There are laws establishing the privacy of an individual, and the media needs to extend these rights to public figures. Problems with the paparazzi is an increasing issue that needs to be stopped because it is ruining people's lives. Public figures are entitled to their own private lives, and up until two generations ago this was not a problem. President Franklin D.

    Roosevelt used a wheel chair or braces, but that disability was rarely mentioned and almost never photographed. Many previous presidents were unfaithful to their wives, but the media did not cover these affairs that were common knowledge to the press corps (Knowlton 51). However, the extramarital affairs of President Clinton were widely covered by the media. The ethical code of conduct has fallen apart, and the media has new views of the amount of privacy that should be extended to public figures.

    According to Steven Knowlton, author of Moral Reasoning for Journalists, "Celebrities of all sorts- musicians, athletes, entertainers, and others- make their living from the public and the public therefore in a sense employs them, just as it employs governors and presidents... ." (54). Most journalists figure that celebrities voluntarily surrender their privacy as part of an unwritten contract with the members of society who pay their salaries through purchasing. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled in 1964 Sullivan v. New York Times case, that vulnerability is taken as a price of admission to the public arena.

    The privilege to cover public figures is almost unlimited, and the public figures have few privacy rights. People reasonably expect privacy inside a house or fenced yard not visible for the street and inside living facilities such as in hospitals and nursing homes. Photographers need permission to both enter and photograph these private places. However, anyone is fair game to be photographed and have their picture published if the photo was taken in a public place. This includes people seen though the windows of their own home (Dill 178).

    However, the New York Court ruled that photographers shooting inside a restaurant needed permission because the restaurant was a public place for purposes of dining, and patrons dining there should reasonably be allowed to dine in peace (Dill 177). Even though it is currently legal to photograph public figures in the privacy of their own homes, ethically speaking it does not mean these pictures should be published. However, because ethical codes are not working, there needs to be legal reform. Additionally, breaking and entering or using trickery, impersonation, fraud and disguise to gain admission to a private area are illegal.

    Even though these acts are illegal, some members of the media still break the law to get the picture or story they want. Often times, photographers or reporters who are illegally in a private place are forced to leave, but it is usually after they already have the picture or quote they want. Public figures need to press charges so members of the media with no respect for the law are punished. According to Smolla, the author of Suing the Press, "Paparazzi photographers specialize in making themselves as visible to the public and as cloyingly obnoxious to their photographic subjects as possible." (120). Some public figures find it necessary to go to the authorities in order to keep the paparazzi away. For example, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and her children were the ongoing preoccupation of Donald Galella, who fancied himself a paparazzo (Smolla 120).

    Onassis sued Galella, seeking not money but a court order forcing him to stop his paparazzi tactics. Onassis won and Galella was ordered to keep 100 yards away from both Onassis and her children at all times (Smolla 121). Public figures should not find it necessary to personally seek legal action to ensure their privacy from the media. Therefore, if the ethical and moral codes of conduct are not working, the laws and authorities should take a more active approach to ensure the privacy of public figures. Many people have expressed their feelings toward the paparazzi in various ways. The death of Princess Diana has increased greatly increased the disgust and anger directed towards the paparazzi.

    Princess Di was being chased by seven paparazzi during the fatal accident, and many people have blamed the paparazzi for her death. The princess herself had pleaded with paparazzi in the past to leave her alone, begging for protection from what she called a distressing intrusion into her private life. She even filed a restraining order against one photographer a year before her death. Famous actor, Tom Cruise commented, "I have actually been in the same tunnel being chased by paparazzi and they run lights and chase you and harass you the whole time and it happens all over the world." (Claffely). Tom Cruise has also called for laws to control the paparazzi. There have been many other run-ins with the paparazzi.

    For instance, Arnold Shwarzenager and Maria Shriver were ambushed by celebrity photographers and trapped in a Mercedes-Benz between two cars piloted by paparazzi, who were charged with a misdemeanor for false imprisonment. Some celebrities have used violence to fight against the paparazzi while others have maintained vocal opposition. For instance, Alec Baldwin and his wife Kim Basinger were confronted by a photographer as they brought their newborn daughter home for the hospital. Baldwin punched him and was acquitted with battery charge.

    In addition, George Clooney, upset about a broadcast on his girlfriend, urged a Boycott of Paramount Pictures Television Group because its tabloid TV shows use video paparazzi footage (Chaffey). Will Smith and Woody Harrelson both took swings at tabloid shooters in separate airport incidents and Robert DeNiro battled with a photographer in New York. Futher more, magazines, newspapers, and other publications deserve part of the blame associated with the paparazzi because they pay large sums of money for photos, encouraging the ruthless and greedy photographers. However, many American publications did not accept offers to buy photos of Princess Di and the crash scene because they wanted to send a message to the paparazzi. New technology is making it extremely difficult for both celebrities and ordinary people to insulate themselves from public view, especially at their most vulnerable moments. People who have lost a child, spouse, or who are in another time of grief are often unable to grieve privately, simply because of the persistence of someone who wants to exploit their tragedy.

    However, it is usually illegal to photograph a widow inside a funeral home or at a religious service without permission. Nonetheless, reporters and photographers should take a second think about what they are about to publish and how they obtained the information or photograph. There are laws protecting the privacy of an individual, and all of these should be extended further to include public figures. In addition, policy makers should strongly consider passing new laws to increase the privacy given to all individuals. At the least, they should prohibit photographers from invading a private domain with the use of long-distance photographic equipment and other high-tech equipment. They should also make is a misdemeanor to publish photographs taken without permission in a home or other private place.

    Even though these are not currently illegal actions, the media should act as if they were. Like other people, public figures should be able to separate their jobs from their family and personal lives. When public figures are spending time with their families, they should not be harassed by the media; Does our society have to revolve around knowing every detail of other people's lives? This problem has grown rapidly and people need to stop and think about the right thing to do. The paparazzi need to be stopped and it could be on the decline if more people stepped forward to change the law. Intrusions on the privacy of celebrities are intrusions on the privacy of everyone..

    Following example essays might be related to your topic and facilitate your research and writing.

    • Media And The Government

      585 words

      The media can often have a large impact on public opinion. The general community can be swayed based purely upon how the news carries a story. This places a massive responsibility on the media. They must decide what is appropriate and how to address certain topics. In the cartoon the author was desc...
    • Media And Politics Agenda Setting And Framing

      869 words

      How has media influenced public perception of political figures, issues, and institutions? Through agenda setting and framing, media has the power to set the agenda for political discussion by providing public attention to political figures, issues, and institutions. In addition, the media can frame...
    • Paparazzi In Thailand Thai Media

      2,736 words

      PAPARAZZI; COULD IT BE SEEN ONE DAY IN THAILAND? Introduction The paparazzi are photographers who will certainly do anything to achieve their aim, gaining the profit from the photos of famous people and their families. They sell the photos to tabloids or anyone else who is willing to pay them a high...

    Still cannot find the paper you need? Buy essay or research paper tailored exactly to your instructions and demands -- original, written from scratch for you!

    Free essay examples, how to write essay on Paparazzi Celebrities And The Media

    0 thoughts on “Paparazzi Opinion Essay

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *