Artist's personal life?

[luckyeight]

If a performing musician is in the public eye, is it reasonable for them to expect privacy if they do not court press, or should they accept that there will be interest in their personal life that is an inevitable consequence of their music being widely heard?

[robertson]

the latter is how it is these days, like it or not

[Backdrifter]

I don't agree the latter is inevitable. There are plenty of very successful recording artists out there who don't receive much press coverage. I'm a big Radiohead fan, for example, they're massively successful, their albums top the charts and their tours always sell out, but you don't see constant coverage of their every move. You could argue it's different for bands and solo artists but there are plenty of the latter who also don't have the tabloids or Heat chasing them all the time. The media seem to focus on certain personalities, especially if they have had any kind of "controversy" attached to them, or are half a celebrity couple.

The thing we, and the media, seem to forget is that these people are just that - people. I don't think "courting publicity" - whatever that means - is license for photographers to follow people to supermarkets, their children's schools, on holidays, etc.

[andy-hughes]

We get the media we deserve - for some reason people love to see the rich and famous with bad hair / spots / belly overhang / having a row, etc. etc.

I think it is reasonable for any person to expect a reasonable degree of privacy, whether they 'court' the press or not. The media bleat that they 'make' the artist, but aside from 'celebrities' a musician is famous for his or her art, not for simply being seen on TV.

Privacy is precious, but I have no time for those who create a fuss, and then moan when the media gather. Remember Madonna toruing the UK and going jogging in Leeds at 6.00 a.m.? No problem, except she took six (!) huge black minders with her, and then wondered why the paps. showed up!