Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Of Tabloids and Rumors

I hate to push Jade's post down, but I thought this article was timely. Normally I don't follow celebrity gossip because I don't care, but the tone behind this article fits the current situation.

Vince Vaughn to tabloids: Watch it

NEW YORK (AP) -- Paging all tabloids: Be careful about what you write about Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston.

According to a statement released by a London law firm, the 36-year-old actor would be filing a "legal complaint" against a tabloid trio -- the New York Post and the Britain-based Daily Mirror and The Sun -- that said he was seen kissing a "mystery blonde" at an October 8 charity event in London and had called it quits with Aniston.

"Ms. Aniston and Mr. Vaughn had not ended their relationship either at the material time or since ... The suggestion that he was having a passionate embrace and kiss, or has ever been unfaithful to Ms. Aniston, are false," the statement said.

Aniston has also gone public about their couplehood -- albeit, in a kindler, gentler way. On Monday's "Oprah," the 37-year-old actress revealed that she and Vaughn are still together.

When Winfrey asked if she and Vaughn were "broken up," Aniston replied, "No, no."

If no settlement is reached between Vaughn and the tabloids, the case "is expected to go to jury trial in London's High Court" next year, the statement said.

Vaughn's spokesman, John Pisani, did not immediately respond Tuesday to an e-mail by The Associated Press seeking details about the lawsuit.

I think a lot of times people don't realise how their comments could hurt. However unintentional it might be, those "innocent" statements, taken out of context, can damage relationships, careers, and make someone's life hell.

It's also disturbing that some believe that because a person is famous, he or she doesn't deserve a private life. This belief takes away the person's humanity and ultimately objectifies the person. Whether that famous person be Anderson Cooper or anyone else, he or she deserves the ability to keep some parts of his or her life out of the public eye.

2 comentarios:

Purple Tie said...

I have to say that I can understand why some would say that when you choose to be famous you loose your private life. However, no one should be treated as bad as some are. I thought after Princess Di died a few years back that things would get better but they are worse.

Also, I do see a bit of a difference between someone that seeks publicity (ie Paris Hilton) and someone like Anderson that does not put his private life out there. (By private I mean love life, not family life).

I knew someone that had a lot of knowledge about the paparazzi and he told me that A LOT of the people you see in those kinds of papers want to be there. What's the old saying...something about there never being bad publicity as long as they spell your name right? Some stars have the "people" call and tip off photographers about where the star is eating so that their pictures get out in the papers. There's a really ugly side to this stuff and I believe someone like Anderson does not participate in that kind of thing. I don't really have much sympanthy of some of the celebs but I do for those that don't want that attention and don't seek it.

ivy said...

purple tie -- good post!


Don't think for me. Don't assume what I want to hear or read. Give me facts. Give me reasons. But not yours. Bring me debate. Enlighten me. Today, accountability is masked behind anonymity; bylines are hidden by zeros and ones. Everyone publishes; everyone is "in the know." Ethics are non-existent. Speculation is king. The truth is masked and a hostage. Empowered by our minds, WE ARE THE FREAKSPEAKERS!


This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues of environmental, political, news and humanitarian significance. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such material as provided in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with the title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this blog is distributed and available without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

If your obsession against us and our content endures, you might find more information at: Law.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the blog owner.