St Andrews Church, Epworth- Car Quiz -...
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Caroline Flack - Were The Press Really To Blame?
134 Answers
Masses of people on social media blaming the tabloid press for the tragic suicide of Caroline Flack, but can anyone explain in what way(s) the press were to blame - examples of articles would be helpful. I didn’t know the lady but she seemed to enjoy the spotlight as much as most celebrities....until the incident with her boyfriend. Is the suggestion that the press shouldn’t have reported on that and her consequent court appearance? Isn’t it their job to report on such incidents? I can’t help feeling that If they stopped such reporting, they’d stop selling papers....which may well be what the tabloid haters want.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by thesshhh. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"wearing a track suit, no make-up, hair scraped up, and sun glasses, the epitome of a famous person trying to do something normal"
As pointed out earlier, if you're famous you don't get to pick and choose what for. Anyone with half a brain cell knows celebrities are normal people with jobs and personal lives.
Treat her like a celeb or treat her like a normal human. One would get world wide coverage over a suicide the other would get a small mention in the local obituary.
As pointed out earlier, if you're famous you don't get to pick and choose what for. Anyone with half a brain cell knows celebrities are normal people with jobs and personal lives.
Treat her like a celeb or treat her like a normal human. One would get world wide coverage over a suicide the other would get a small mention in the local obituary.
On the night of the alleged lamp attack she told police she would kill herself.
https:/
https:/
royfromaus - // andy mentions 'pointless nasty gossiping'
Can this woman not go a day without turning the conversation round to her (tragically) deceased daughter!!!!
I feel better now ...
(I could easily fill the page) //
I spend some of my leisure time on here idly gossiping with strangers on a limited access website, sure in the knowledge that my ramblings remain unread by the people I am discussing.
I spend my professional time interviewing musicians whose quotes are read in magazines and on websites around the world.
There, I am scrupulously careful to quote them accurately and in context, and I never re-align their quotes to make them say something they do not actually mean.
For example - when Phil Collins said to me, quote "When people come and see a Genesis show, they know they are going to see something really good..." I nodded in agreement, as a fan, in conversation.
When I put the quote in the feature, where it was not in a conversation that moved on, and was not thought about could be re-read and thought about, I decided that it conveyed an impression of arrogance which Mr Collins clearly did not state, or infer, and I took the comment out.
That's the difference - my musings on here do not equate with the hypocrisy of the top columnist in one of the biggest selling national papers, compounding its own hypocrisy while pointing the finger at others who are merely guilty of the same circulation-boosting garbage.
Can this woman not go a day without turning the conversation round to her (tragically) deceased daughter!!!!
I feel better now ...
(I could easily fill the page) //
I spend some of my leisure time on here idly gossiping with strangers on a limited access website, sure in the knowledge that my ramblings remain unread by the people I am discussing.
I spend my professional time interviewing musicians whose quotes are read in magazines and on websites around the world.
There, I am scrupulously careful to quote them accurately and in context, and I never re-align their quotes to make them say something they do not actually mean.
For example - when Phil Collins said to me, quote "When people come and see a Genesis show, they know they are going to see something really good..." I nodded in agreement, as a fan, in conversation.
When I put the quote in the feature, where it was not in a conversation that moved on, and was not thought about could be re-read and thought about, I decided that it conveyed an impression of arrogance which Mr Collins clearly did not state, or infer, and I took the comment out.
That's the difference - my musings on here do not equate with the hypocrisy of the top columnist in one of the biggest selling national papers, compounding its own hypocrisy while pointing the finger at others who are merely guilty of the same circulation-boosting garbage.
TheDevil - // "wearing a track suit, no make-up, hair scraped up, and sun glasses, the epitome of a famous person trying to do something normal"
As pointed out earlier, if you're famous you don't get to pick and choose what for. Anyone with half a brain cell knows celebrities are normal people with jobs and personal lives.
Treat her like a celeb or treat her like a normal human. One would get world wide coverage over a suicide the other would get a small mention in the local obituary. //
I am not sure I made my point clear.
Celebrities must, and do, accept that their lives are the subject of interest from strangers, that is by definition, what celebrity means.
But they are still entitled to a private life, like the rest of us.
So if Ms. Flack is in public attending a film premier, or at a celebrity party, I am sure being photographed there, and arriving and leaving is acceptable and indeed expected.
But when she goes for a walk on her own near her home, it is reasonable to expect that a stranger is not going to shove a camera at her and take her picture looking 'normal', i.e. unglamorous.
Sadly there is a market for this kind of image, which makes it worthwhile someone hanging around near her home until she comes out, and then interfering with her privacy to take her picture, uninvited, or wanted.
The market is us, and it's wrong, because there is no benefit whatsoever in seeing Ms Flack 'off duty' - except to point and comment about how different she looks when not doing her job.
If the public stopped is appetite for this trash, the papers would stop printing it to sell copies, and maybe society would be moving slowly towards the notion that famous people are actually not on show for our amusement twenty-four seven, they are entitled to what we all have, and take for granted - some privacy to lead their own lives away from their jobs.
As pointed out earlier, if you're famous you don't get to pick and choose what for. Anyone with half a brain cell knows celebrities are normal people with jobs and personal lives.
Treat her like a celeb or treat her like a normal human. One would get world wide coverage over a suicide the other would get a small mention in the local obituary. //
I am not sure I made my point clear.
Celebrities must, and do, accept that their lives are the subject of interest from strangers, that is by definition, what celebrity means.
But they are still entitled to a private life, like the rest of us.
So if Ms. Flack is in public attending a film premier, or at a celebrity party, I am sure being photographed there, and arriving and leaving is acceptable and indeed expected.
But when she goes for a walk on her own near her home, it is reasonable to expect that a stranger is not going to shove a camera at her and take her picture looking 'normal', i.e. unglamorous.
Sadly there is a market for this kind of image, which makes it worthwhile someone hanging around near her home until she comes out, and then interfering with her privacy to take her picture, uninvited, or wanted.
The market is us, and it's wrong, because there is no benefit whatsoever in seeing Ms Flack 'off duty' - except to point and comment about how different she looks when not doing her job.
If the public stopped is appetite for this trash, the papers would stop printing it to sell copies, and maybe society would be moving slowly towards the notion that famous people are actually not on show for our amusement twenty-four seven, they are entitled to what we all have, and take for granted - some privacy to lead their own lives away from their jobs.
andy says 'I hope, but seriously doubt, that the unbelievable absence of self-awareness that clearly infects the Mail's editorial'
and yet he shows zero awareness of his sick obsession of running down with a mother and deceased daughter, actually referring to this obsession as
andy says
' me light-heartedly making sport of Ms. Hunniford's morbid obsession on here'
and yet he shows zero awareness of his sick obsession of running down with a mother and deceased daughter, actually referring to this obsession as
andy says
' me light-heartedly making sport of Ms. Hunniford's morbid obsession on here'
royfromaus - // andy says 'I hope, but seriously doubt, that the unbelievable absence of self-awareness that clearly infects the Mail's editorial'
and yet he shows zero awareness of his sick obsession of running down with a mother and deceased daughter, actually referring to this obsession as
andy says
' me light-heartedly making sport of Ms. Hunniford's morbid obsession on here' //
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about my 'sick obsession' (steady on!) with Ms. Hunnford which is far larger than my 'obsession' actually is.
If you don't like what I say, you are entitled to ignore it, as I am entitled to ignore any future observations you make about me on this subject.
Thanks for your input.
and yet he shows zero awareness of his sick obsession of running down with a mother and deceased daughter, actually referring to this obsession as
andy says
' me light-heartedly making sport of Ms. Hunniford's morbid obsession on here' //
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about my 'sick obsession' (steady on!) with Ms. Hunnford which is far larger than my 'obsession' actually is.
If you don't like what I say, you are entitled to ignore it, as I am entitled to ignore any future observations you make about me on this subject.
Thanks for your input.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about my 'sick obsession'
No bee in any bonnet. I am just pointing out quite rightly that you are a hypocrite. Don't let it bother you though (as if it would) the vast majority of people on social media are being hypocritical about this whole Caroline Flack story.
No bee in any bonnet. I am just pointing out quite rightly that you are a hypocrite. Don't let it bother you though (as if it would) the vast majority of people on social media are being hypocritical about this whole Caroline Flack story.
"The market is us, and it's wrong, because there is no benefit whatsoever in seeing Ms Flack 'off duty'"
I disagree. When people think of Caroline flack they think of her on Love Island, or stricktly, where she is portrayed as a rather powerful woman.
The benefit of a photograph of her just looking normal, maybe even tired and more shabby than usual, is that it allows people to relate to her private life in a way we're not able to view whilst she's on the TV screen or a red carpet. It also reminds us that she lives a life we're unaware of, and during that time she assaulted her boyfriend. Should that part of her life be brushed under the carpet, because she's famous?
I disagree. When people think of Caroline flack they think of her on Love Island, or stricktly, where she is portrayed as a rather powerful woman.
The benefit of a photograph of her just looking normal, maybe even tired and more shabby than usual, is that it allows people to relate to her private life in a way we're not able to view whilst she's on the TV screen or a red carpet. It also reminds us that she lives a life we're unaware of, and during that time she assaulted her boyfriend. Should that part of her life be brushed under the carpet, because she's famous?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.