This is based on an article I wrote several years ago and while slightly out of date it still asks relevant questions.
If you are to meet a celebrity you will no doubt find them surrounded by the popular press or the so-called “Paparazzi” with their clicking cameras and an ear for gossip. The truth is people are interested in the everyday lives of celebrities and the Paparazzi would argue the point that they are providing people with what they want, human interest stories with a face. It wasn't that long ago that David Beckham’s name come under the scrutiny of the ever-eager Paparazzi as they have questioned his marital faithfulness to Victoria, not only with one other woman, but with two! Is this kind of press coverage intrusive or do we have a right to know all of the details of a person’s private life – however famous they are?
The most prominent case concerning the Paparazzi is of course the events that led to the death of Princess Diana of Wales in August 1997. She died as a result of a car crash that - it is claimed - was ultimately caused by the pursuing Paparazzi. Diana was a well-loved figure trapped in a loveless marriage for a number of years. Then she finally seemed to find happiness with her new boyfriend Dodi Al-Fayed. There was an unprecedented outpouring of grief throughout Britain that quickly turned to anger, directed at both the Royal Family and the Paparazzi.
A few years before her death Diana had appeared on a British TV programme that was shown to millions around the world where she poured out her heart about her marital situation, her fight with bulimia and her affair with James Hewitt (she didn’t however mention her other affairs). She also told her story about her various attempts at suicide. At times as she shared her sad story she was moved to tears, as were many of those who watched the interview.
However it could be argued that by doing the interview, and “airing her dirty laundry in public” she invited the attention of the press and their intrusiveness and scrutiny. Maybe the real question concerning Princess Diana was who manipulated whom? And if Diana was the main manipulator was what the Paparazzi were doing really intruding? She had, after all, given them free licence about most of her life and put everything into the public domain
All kinds of conspiracy theories have developed as to why Diana died, most blaming the Paparazzi, but maybe the answer is simple. She died because she was driving too fast in a car, without a seatbelt on, with a driver who was unfit to drive; the fact that the only survivor of the car crash had his seat belt on bears witness to this. They didn’t have to try to race away from the Paparazzi, however much they were being pursued.
Maybe the Paparazzi can be intrusive, but the truth is that their work sells. Are we the real intruders? The Paparazzi wouldn’t succeed if there wasn’t a market for their material. David and Victoria Beckham have thus far provided us with an example of how to deal with intrusion. They have only made a few public statements, mainly through their lawyer and dealt with things with a quiet dignity. As a result the story has largely gone away and in even more recent years so have the Paparazzi.
Maybe it is because we have become so self absorbed in our own social media.
As always stay safe and well my friends.
