helena said:
jadee you are right there is a hypocracy in the tabloid press. But I think there is a legitimate public interest in knowing the truth about this girl who is sooo influential to young women. You just need to look at the posts here to see how much people adore her....but she is an illusion and she isn't a good role model. I do think people should know the truth. Thats why I don't think any claim that her privacy was breached will wash.
As I said before with priviledge comes responsibility.
Hmm ... I'm not sure about our "right" to invade people's private life.
From a legal point of view it can be accepted but from a moral point of view it can't .
I think I understand what you're saying about people adoring a celebrity who show a false image of herself but isn't it the job of a model to project an illusion?
It reminds me of Racine:
"Je ne méritais, ni cet excès d'honneur, ni cette
indignité "
which I badly translate into:
"I didn't deserve this excess of honors nor this indignity."
What they did is sick IMO. If I had presonal problems I wouldn't want to be exposed in public for people to juge me.
Of course she isn't a good role model but when did she claim she was a role model?
Why should she be a role model?
Because she's rich and famous?
Is it morally wrong to have weaknesses when you're rich and famous?
I don't think we look up to celebrities for morallity.
All I ask from a model is being good at modelling.
And that's all we should do in an ideal world.
Of course I say "we" a lot because I include myself .I'm no angel. I'm wondering about all this too.
ETA: thank you Iluvjeisa. I like to read your posts.
You sounds wise to me.
