The Instigator
hoosty69
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
madhumita
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Harrasing Celebrities

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,081 times Debate No: 42738
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)

 

hoosty69

Con

So many magazines, TV shows and social media give us the inside of the daily lives of celebrities.
Really???? I still don't understand the level of infatuation one has with celebrities. Why do people feel the ultimate need to invade these peoples lives? Like I have said before, their not gods or super hero's, they are human beings that have done very well during their careers. Some have families, a life outside the stardom. Why would you want to invade their privacy's, read their drama on twitter or if they had irregular bowel movement. This again I say is so weird that people make a living off of snooping around famous people just to satisfy the people with the fix on needing to know. I thought the right to privacy is a very important part of one's life ( is it not for you as a individual?). Do you feel celebrities owe you cause you bought a movie ticket, concert ticket, pushed your family or friends aside to catch an episode on TV, or plainly you have a shrine in your spare room? It's amazing when folks like myself would be looking through the news to keep up on sports scores, currency, world news, weather and this kind of stuff is always jumping out at you. Does it even matter what the stars think about the paparazzi invading their lives to serve you? Is it your dream to catch that person being human and making mistakes leaving you with the ability to judge them?

Anyway I gotta stop, obviously I'm getting carried away with what would appears to be common sense to most of us. Any more than this would be considered a rant. Just a thought of trying to understand.

Merry Christmas

Mike
madhumita

Pro

The ,celebrities' as you call them are 'human beings that have done very well during there careers'. Bang on there but then what makes them celebrities and who makes them so. Their claim to fame lies in the fact that we have given them recognition. So if I am instrumental in somebody being special then sure I have a right to know how and what she/he is doing. They do not remain private people any longer. To what extent one wants to know is a personal call which varies. You need not ignore your news,weather,sports score etc just to look at all this. All of it is there so you take a look at what you want to. Knowing all kinds of things will only increase your knowledge and maybe have an effect on your common sense. As far as harassment is concerned that is a problem of the celebrity and not mine.
Debate Round No. 1
hoosty69

Con

I'm guessing then people feel that if a person becomes successful to the point of being a celebrity, he or she owes to all those people who bought the CD, concert ticket, and or movie the right to privacy invasion. My purchase along with others in a combined effort have now made this person part of the so called top 10 of their industry and have now (like what they sell) have become nothing more than product. So of course they best not have families because I couldn't Imagine celebrity parents nor anyone for that matter involving children in the kind of circus life the paparazzi has instilled on them based on the public demand on wanting to know everything.. You say " as far as harassment is concerned that is a problem of the celebrity and not mine". I believe the harassment is everyone's problem, I'm sure if you were harassed you would do everything in your power to stop it which may also include getting the law involved. If you or myself were being harassed, i'm sure it could be very hurtful, even life changing and with that being said you don't think it should be our problem? It's everybody's problem, in the end these are rights we as citizens have fought for with out prejudice.
I guess if you want to be an actor or actress and yet your not interested in having your privacy taken from you, you best reconsider your dream because if you become famous your rights will be revoked.
madhumita

Pro

At the onset I must say I am enjoying this because you are very clear in your arguments. First of all A Merry Christmas to you.
Now for the arguments. Yes you have guessed right, of course they owe their success to all those people who bought the CD,concert tickets etc and the paparazzi for highlighting them. Yes of course, if they are selling whatever they make then it is a product. Whether they want to have families or not and whether they want us to know about their families is their choice. If I was harassed I would definitely take a stance because I am not a celebrity. Why don't the celebrities ever do anything about it? They themselves want to remain in the limelight that is why. If the paparazzi wanted to know the most private moments of the celebrities then they would have to use means like hidden cameras etc. That does not happen. Today's celebrities mostly talk about themselves to remain in the limelight. You are right when you say that my rights to privacy will be revoked if I choose to be an actor or actress. If that did not happen I would not be a celebrity. Being a celebrity means being in the limelight and that cannot happen if they are private. I conclude that it is their choice to make themselves public people so here we are taking an interest in their lives.
Debate Round No. 2
hoosty69

Con

And Merry Christmas to you and your family. Yes this debate been fun.
When I was mentioning product I know that what they sell is product, that is obvious, what I was referring to was making the celebrity product and that to me is wrong. With regards to their families being involved and stating its their choice is a fine line. How many times have we seen these people go on a date to a restaurant or take the kids out for a supper and get hounded by photographers to the point of forcing their way through just to get in an entrance. Not exactly a healthy environment for a child or a date and not a choice of privacy unless the decision is stay in hiding all the time which is not fair for anyone trying to enjoy a little freedom. Yes there are times when a celebrity uses the moment to show off their date - that's their choice I get that. I agree there are those that live for the lime light and enjoy the full out attention but it's not for everyone and this is where me argument lies. Some prefer to just use the special events such as premiers, awards, and charities to showcase their appearances. To me I respect that since I'm sure their planners are loaded with these events and why not just leave it at that? An extreme example of what I remember as privacy invasion was when a camera man took photos of Will and Kate at a private retreat in France, the cameraman had to hide in the trees, trespass, and use a telephoto lens to get the shot. What's next, satellite cameras??? extreme - yes, possible in the future - maybe. (Hopefully it would never come to that). In the end it just seems very strange that one would put so much interest in another fellow humans life because of the roll they play. Another example of strange to me was when Paul Walker passed away (Fast & Furious actor) it flooded the news like a plague but when a world Icon like Nelson Mandela passed away he didn't get near that kind of coverage, nor does the mass murders that happen in other countries. Its like we all have our priorities all mixed up (probably another debate).
Anyway all the best, hope you and your family enjoy the holidays pending you get the time off.
madhumita

Pro

I do not know which nation you belong to but in my country from what I see around me I feel that the celebrities want this kind of attention and my arguments are based on that. I know of a celebrity who wanted a handsome amount since she was going to make a public appearance in her Alma Mater on the 125th year celebrations. It was an invitation and the school already renowned would not rise to any great level because of her presence. Now if they are going to be so business like then other people will also make business out of them. Once you become a public figure your life hardly remains private. That is why Nelson Mandela's death is in the entire newspapers of our country while the rape and murder of an ordinary girl gets hidden somewhere. This very example will tell you why a celebrity is a celebrity. Of course I as an ordinary human being would dislike any invasion of my privacy but if I were to be a celebrity I couldn't avoid it. If we talk about journalists invading the privacy then, they are here to make money and the most unique scoop they can give, the better their prospects are. They are only doing their job. As you have rightly given an "extreme' example but that is extreme is it not? Why on earth would a celebrity come to the balcony of his/her home and wave out to the crowd outside if he/she did not seek attention? Why would the breast removal of a celebrity become public if she did not want it? I do feel strongly that though we are debating over this harassment the celebrities don't mind because if they did then by now some legal steps would have been taken. Its the non-celebrity who reacts against privacy invasion but does a celebrity ever do that?
Debate Round No. 3
hoosty69

Con

At this point of the debate I am shorting my explanation as I have said most of what I needed to say. I live in Canada, and while there are some attempts of cover ups it is dangerous for those who try because once the public finds out it explodes into a media frenzy. I have heard about the rapes in India and it breaks my heart that women are still treated as objects and hope that through law and education this will turn for the best. Here in North America we too have some celebrities that love being in the public eye whether they embarrass themselves or not as well as those who do there job and at the end of the day just want to go home and enjoy their life as we do. The celebrities that ask for outrageous amounts of money for special appearances such as charities and fundraisers usually get laughed at and that kind of stuff makes the general news, whereas the celebrities that want to live the private life do these events for free and cover their own costs. I support everyone choice on the way they live their lives (as long as it hinder other people) but if one chooses to be open about everything doesn't mean that all celebrities should also be expected to do the same. In the USA some celebrities have taken this issue to the government and with on going debate are fighting for their right to a private and harassment free life. This battle still goes on.
madhumita

Pro

Yes, I agree that we have said most of what we wanted to. I agree when you say that there are some who would want to keep their lives private. However the problem lies in the fact that we are categorising them into a class called 'celebrities' and once you are one of them then you are in the limelight whether you like it or not. How much a celebrity feels harassed is a question in itself. The celebrities are quite a powerful lot and if they fight strongly enough I am sure the law would be beside them. There comes another question. Why have they not done it so far? Is it because they consider it no harassment but enjoy every bit of it? Maybe they do. Every profession has its lifestyle even when they are not at the workplace. As a teacher, even when I go out with my family I am conscious about how I conduct myself lest any of my students or their parents are around the place. I don't feel harassed because of that. Simply speaking when you are in a profession you will have to go by the pros and cons attached to it and there is no way out of it. When you consciously choose to join a profession which will turn you into a celebrity and yet you don't like being in public eye then you will consciously have to avoid doing it or accept it as a part of your life and not as a harassment.
Debate Round No. 4
hoosty69

Con

I shall finish up by saying my arguments have been posted in the previous rounds and in the end celebrities are everyday people like ourselves and should be treated as such. if they want to have the world watch their every move that's their choice but it should also be respected for those who want to live a private and harassment free live outside their jobs as we do. To me life is to short to worry about what a celebrity is doing on a daily basis when their are everyday more important things to worry about such as politics that affect our well being as a nation, family, friends, and environment.
Not mention that I don't believe we should discriminate on who should and who should not have rights of freedom. We are a humans.
thank you
Mike
madhumita

Pro

It has been a wonderful experience participating in this debate. I will still differ on the point that celebrities are everyday people like us simply because they are termed as celebrities. When one wants to enjoy the glamour that comes with being labelled a celebrity one has to accept the fact that they cannot remain private. It may cause them to feel harassed at certain points but they have chosen this life for themselves. I would also like to repeat that every profession has its brighter and darker sides and this simply is the dark side of being a celebrity.
Wishing you and your family a wonderful New Year.
Debate Round No. 5
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by neptune1bond 3 years ago
neptune1bond
I also have enjoyed our side-debate. I hope that as people continue to stand up for what's right that we can influence laws for the better and eventually create a situation where all danger, harassment, and unfairness can be eliminated from all professions, or at least as much as possible. I just hope that we can work for a day when people can fulfill their passion in life, but still not have to be subject to unsafe or unfair treatment.

Speaking of teachers, I've actually heard of a teacher being fired because she had a picture on her facebook page where she was holding an alcoholic drink. I understand the concern over how a teacher portrays himself/herself, especially to his/her students, but at the same time a teacher should have a right to a personal life as well. No school could ever fire a teacher if someone went to a restaurant and saw them having a glass of wine, that would be completely unreasonable. So how can they justify it if someone just has a picture of themselves HOLDING an alcoholic drink. Anyways, I thought the story was interesting and that I'd mention it since it relates to our discussion.
Posted by madhumita 3 years ago
madhumita
Not at all. In fact I have quite enjoyed this parallel debate. There are many things which are not ok yet there is no way out of it. As I said every profession has its dark side. As a human being I am completely against any other living being killed whether he is a law breaker or a law keeper. But that's the dark side of the profession. A policeman is given a gun to be used as and when required and it is expected he will use it if required. Now the law breaker might also have a gun which I am aware he is not supposed to have but he too will use it on the policeman to save his own life. That's illegal I know but at the same time that is the dark side of the police profession. I am a teacher and I have to be careful of the clothes I wear and the way I conduct myself because I live in a small place and everyone knows my profession. It is difficult not to be yourself at all times. I understand that but I am sure you will agree that if I am conscious about this so are celebrities. They must on their own be careful to avoid what you and I am calling harassment. If they don't do that then they cannot complain of harassment. Hopefully one day there will be a law in place so that they can do what they wish to without feeling harassed. I still feel that most of them and most of the time they quite enjoy it because remaining in the limelight will keep them in the news and they will remain celebrities.
Posted by neptune1bond 3 years ago
neptune1bond
I get very involved in discussions on here, so I hope you don't take it personally. It isn't meant as an attack on you.

You're right that being a celebrity means that you will probably be harassed, but my point I keep trying to state is, does that suddenly make it o.k.? There used to be a time when being black in the U.S.A. meant that you should expect to be a slave, but that doesn't make it right. Celebrities have been trying to take legal action, but they have been unable to find protection, so it isn't from a lack of effort that something isn't done. I personally would not be o.k. on any level if someone started sneaking onto my property to photograph and film me without permission or if they started stalking me everywhere I went and filming and taking pictures of me either. I also wouldn't be o.k. with it if people started trying to dig up every detail of my personal life that is really no one else's business and started putting it newspapers for everyone to read. If I find that to be horribly wrong, then why should I expect celebrities to be o.k. with it? Shouldn't someone be able to leave their job and have some private time? Shouldn't someone have the right to have a life outside of work? Just because things are the way that they are, it doesn't mean that it's the way it should be.

Btw, my point with the doctor/acid thing is that if people were doing something horrible to doctors and being a doctor meant that you might expect that kind of horrible treatment, that doesn't make it o.k. For example, being a police officer means that you could get shot, but I think that we should try as a society to do everything we can to stop that from happening. If there was a law that we could pass that would stop all police officers from being shot ever again, I would support that law, wouldn't you? Or should we just say,"getting shot is part of being a police officer, so they should just expect it."?
Posted by madhumita 3 years ago
madhumita
I feel you are more harassed than the celebrities have ever been. No one is supporting bad behaviour. I have a strong feeling now that you may have been harassed and not got justice. The wikipedia link was provided by you and I just quoted from there. Other examples there also point to my 50-50 decision. What on earth made you think I am arguing with you? You are not even the debater. You stated what you felt was correct and I stated what I thought was correct. That is all there is to it. Post on the main debate sometime and I will take up the challenge if I think its worth it. You constantly keep harping on professionals like plumbers and accountants who are already made whereas a celebrity is a celebrity because of many people and they have chosen a profession that brings with it what you call 'harassment'. Every profession has its advantages and disadvantages and they have to live with it till they get legal protection. Obviously there must be some reason why they have not got it so far. What the issue was about throwing acid at some doctor and how it is related is beyond my comprehension. Anyways thanks for closely following the debate.
Posted by neptune1bond 3 years ago
neptune1bond
part 2 (read part 1 below)
If you have no interest in the personal lives of celebrities, as you suddenly say now, then why are you arguing with me?

Also, why shouldn't celebrities have a right to take their kids to the pizza joint? Should they just be confined to their house with all their shutters drawn and their lights off so that they can avoid harassment? You should be concerned about the way the paparazzi conducts themselves because it is wrong. Just because a person becomes a performance artist and happens to find some success, it doesn't mean that certain behavior suddenly becomes acceptable or should be "expected" by anyone. Yes it happens, but that doesn't make it o.k. No person who becomes a professional at anything suddenly "deserves" poor treatment.

That's why I bring up other professionals like the plumber or the accountant. Let's say that a lot of people started trying to throw acid on doctors if they became successful in their field. Do you want the doctor who helps you when you are sick and has probably saved your life on occasion to have to suffer that? Should he just "expect" to get acid thrown on him just because a lot of people did it? Does that suddenly make it o.k. to throw acid on doctors if lots of people were doing it? If the doctor became successful partially because of your patronage, does that mean you suddenly have a "right" to treat him badly because he wouldn't be where he is without the support of you and others? Celebrities are just professionals that provide a service to the community and they deserve to be treated just as well as anyone else!
Posted by neptune1bond 3 years ago
neptune1bond
You pulled one situation out of the link and try and say that it's a 50-50 deal as though Kanye West represents the entire celebrity population? That doesn't make sense. Many celebrities have stated many many times that they are upset about the harassment and how unfair it is to their families. There are many cases beyond the ones cited in the wikipedia article, by the way, and even within the vast number of cases where celebrities tried to take legal action against the paparazzi only a portion received media attention. So, those that you can easily find only pale in comparison to how many there are and yet it continues! Also, Kanye West has stated in an interview,"Also publishing [issues], they're selling our image and they are selling it in a bad way. [It annoys me more] they are selling my image in a bad way..." and then continues to state that he should at least profit from it. He isn't pleased about the paparazzi and is obviously trying to take action to discourage it (what better way to discourage harassment then to take the money people make from it?) He doesn't want to profit because he loves it, he wants to profit because he believes that he is at LEAST owed that if they will benefit from his image. So, either way, you don't even have a point with the Kanye West situation.

I know that many people make a celebrity, just like many people make a plumber or accountant. There's absolutely no difference and that's why you don't make sense when you think that you are owed anything extra for buying a service from any of them, including celebrities.

Just because a lot of people do something, it doesn't justify immoral or disgusting behavior. If one person contributes to the harassment and harm of another person, they are just as morally reprehensible whether or not "everyone is doing it". Bad behavior isn't suddenly justified just because other people do it too! Or do you think Charles Manson should be absolved because he didn't work alone.
Posted by madhumita 3 years ago
madhumita
If yours is hypothetical mine is real. I am not interested in how the paparazzi conduct themselves nor am I interested in the personal lives of any celebrity. Wikipedia information clearly shows its a 50-50 deal and in 2013 rapper Kanye West, facing assault charges for attacking a photojournalist, said he would fight to get the law changed so celebrities can profit from the paparazzi's work. So paparazzi are not to be banned but used profitably! Celebrities have the power and money and a strong appeal would definitely work in their favour. As far as making a celebrity is concerned anyone I think would understand that no one alone makes one. That is obvious. Many of us contribute to it. That makes sense I am sure. Whether you agree or not makes no difference to the fact that as long as you want to be in the limelight you will be harassed and because you want to be in the limelight you take your kids to the pizza joint round the corner to attract attention since that is not your lifestyle.
Posted by neptune1bond 3 years ago
neptune1bond
O.k., I apparently must explain something to you. In debates and arguments we use things called hypothetical situations and examples to further the argument. You see, I'm not actually fascinated by my plumber and accountant (I don't actually have a specific plumber), but I'm using them as examples to point out that just because a person provides a service or product to you, they are not obligated to divulge any personal information in any way. You are only purchasing the product paid for and that is where the transaction ends! They do not owe you anything more. Why you feel entitled to anything beyond what you actually paid for is beyond me.

It's great that you have a personal relationship with your cobbler or helping hand, but the difference between them and a musician or actor is that they are divulging their personal information to you willingly! When a celebrity agrees to go on an interview or discusses personal details on the red carpet of a movie premier etc., that's fine. It's a little different when people hide in the bushes of their house to take pictures through their living room window or take unwelcome photos of them every time they go shopping or take their kids to the pizza joint on the corner. Celebrities do not enjoy this kind of harassing behavior and have tried many times to take legal action against it but it still goes on. See the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Just like how you didn't make your plumber or accountant what they are, celebrities would probably be celebrities whether or not you personally bought their c.d., movie, or tickets to their concert. I'm sure that your $15-$50 didn't make or break their career, so your mention of this still doesn't make any sense. There is absolutely no reason that a celebrity owes you anything at all other than the product that you paid for. You are not buying a portion of their soul, only a c.d., movie, or concert. That's all you should get and they owe you nothing more.
Posted by madhumita 3 years ago
madhumita
I think you are quite fascinated with your plumber and your accountant and would like to know more about them. Why don't you go ahead and do so. I take keen interest in the life of my helping hand not because I buy her services but because she is an ordinary human being who needs a little bit of my help. The cobbler who comes to mend my shoes tells me of his troubles and I listen because he needs somebody to just listen to him. Similarly many others whose services I buy share there lives as and when required and I try and help. They know they will get some kind of guidance so they share. None of them are celebrities and I have not made them what they are. They were already helping hand and cobbler so I paid for there services. On the other hand when I bought that CD or tickets for the cinema or whatever the celebrities were ordinary people. It is only after our action that they became celebrities so why should we not want to know about them. They want to sell their privacy and we buy that. Fair and square.
Posted by neptune1bond 3 years ago
neptune1bond
According to your logic, it would be no different for my plumber or accountant. My plumber is a plumber because I make him one. If no one payed for his services, he wouldn't be a plumber any more, now would he? He is a plumber just as much from a result of my supporting him as a celebrity would be. Why is the curiosity you mentioned not justified with the plumber? It's the same exact thing! Does that mean that we have a right to anything other than his plumbing services? Of course not! Same with my accountant. You just happen to not be as interested in your plumber's or accountant's life, so you don't try as hard to justify things that are not your business and have nothing to do with you. We buy their services and we only have a right to *the service we actually paid for*! Same thing with celebrities! You pay for a c.d., so you get a c.d. You pay for a movie, you get a movie. You did not pay for rights to their personal information, so you therefor have no right to it! If a celebrity sells you their personal information, then maybe you might have a case. But I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks that $15 or so (the price for a c.d. or movie) is a fair trade for their most intimate details. You didn't do some amazing thing by buying a product, because YOU GOT SOMETHING OUT OF IT! The fact that you bought someone's services or product is the most ridiculous justification for harassment and is not a fair trade in the least.

As far as celebrities' behavior goes, I have met lots of people that behave in bad or ridiculous ways. Does that mean that I have a right to know anything personal about them? OF COURSE NOT! what kind of ridiculous logic is that? If that were true, then we would have the right to know personal info about every person who ever got drunk, smoked marijuana, or had a one night stand! If I get in front of someone's iphone and dance around like fool, that doesn't suddenly give them the right to follow me to my house!
No votes have been placed for this debate.