2008 Woodie Awards
Celebrity follies monopolize entertainment circuit
Alex Haueter
Issue date: 3/28/08 Section: Features
Where exactly is the line between stardom and celebrity? Moreover, why do we even care?
I've wondered that since I was 9 or 10 years old, but the question has been on my mind since about this time last year when it took a homicidal rampage at Virginia Tech University to get "news" shows to stop talking about Don Imus' runaway mouth and Anna Nicole Smith's baby's daddy mystery. Lately, the coverage of Britney Spears' collapsing private life has only poured gasoline on the fire of my bewilderment.
There's a saying for hard news: "If it bleeds, it leads." But this seems even more applicable to the way Americans devour gossip about celebrities. For the life of me, I can't figure out why we so enjoy watching the wreckage as people who are famous for being famous - Smith, Courtney Love, Flava Flav and Paris Hilton spring quickly to mind, and Spears seems to be on the fast-track to joining them on the B-list.
It's particularly frustrating because it grossly taints perception of entertainment news, which is full of interesting characters who deserve attention for the things they've actually accomplished, such as successful movies, albums, art or books.
I just don't care about things like Spears' divorce from the crown-prince of douche baggery or her custody battles or Smith's bastard child. These are things that happen to people of all walks of life, and it has no bearing on me whether these matters get settled for celebrities or for anyone else, for that matter.
I recognize that being a public figure comes with some forfeiture of privacy. There's enough National Enquirer and Us Weekly readers to create a demand for gossip, but the presence of that demand doesn't need to be dignified with supply, much less a round-the-clock supply.
To make matters worse, the idea of the comeback and the rebirth has been overused to the point of becoming cliché. It wasn't actually that long ago that Spears was famous for her work, not her private life, but in the media blitz of her troubles, it seems like ages ago.
Spears and other down-on their-luck celebrities don't need comebacks. They need breaks like any other person, and that need has been stupidly ignored by both the media and the celebrities they cover for far too long.
I'm not suggesting we forget our stars when they go through hard times, but to drag them through the mud (or in front of the cameras) in the wake of divorce, drug addiction, affairs and eating disorders rubs salt in their wounds and ignores real entertainment news about events that actually have a tangible effect on the public, such as new movies worth seeing or albums worth listening to.
Can't we just leave them alone to regroup?
Clearly not.
Instead, we rush the down-and-out back into the limelight, but I can't figure out if it's because we want to see them succeed again or want to see them fail miserably. Maybe it's both.
Take Spears' cameo appearance Monday night on CBS's popular sitcom "How I Met Your Mother." As a fan of the show, all I can say is that I'm grateful that she was clearly a one-off character, and I resent that she was included in the show at all.
Her acting skills are poor, to be kind, and it's obvious her bit part, which could have been filled by any no-name actress and overshadowed an appearance from Sarah Chalke that might actually have some importance to the show's plot, was only intended to get her name out there for something other than being momentarily off her rocker.
Give it a rest. It's not my place to say when someone's career is over, but when a person's tribulations become more noteworthy than his or her work, it's time to take a break, not a cameo.
Alex Haueter is a senior news-editorial major. Reach him at alexhaueter@dailynebraskan.com.
I've wondered that since I was 9 or 10 years old, but the question has been on my mind since about this time last year when it took a homicidal rampage at Virginia Tech University to get "news" shows to stop talking about Don Imus' runaway mouth and Anna Nicole Smith's baby's daddy mystery. Lately, the coverage of Britney Spears' collapsing private life has only poured gasoline on the fire of my bewilderment.
There's a saying for hard news: "If it bleeds, it leads." But this seems even more applicable to the way Americans devour gossip about celebrities. For the life of me, I can't figure out why we so enjoy watching the wreckage as people who are famous for being famous - Smith, Courtney Love, Flava Flav and Paris Hilton spring quickly to mind, and Spears seems to be on the fast-track to joining them on the B-list.
It's particularly frustrating because it grossly taints perception of entertainment news, which is full of interesting characters who deserve attention for the things they've actually accomplished, such as successful movies, albums, art or books.
I just don't care about things like Spears' divorce from the crown-prince of douche baggery or her custody battles or Smith's bastard child. These are things that happen to people of all walks of life, and it has no bearing on me whether these matters get settled for celebrities or for anyone else, for that matter.
I recognize that being a public figure comes with some forfeiture of privacy. There's enough National Enquirer and Us Weekly readers to create a demand for gossip, but the presence of that demand doesn't need to be dignified with supply, much less a round-the-clock supply.
To make matters worse, the idea of the comeback and the rebirth has been overused to the point of becoming cliché. It wasn't actually that long ago that Spears was famous for her work, not her private life, but in the media blitz of her troubles, it seems like ages ago.
Spears and other down-on their-luck celebrities don't need comebacks. They need breaks like any other person, and that need has been stupidly ignored by both the media and the celebrities they cover for far too long.
I'm not suggesting we forget our stars when they go through hard times, but to drag them through the mud (or in front of the cameras) in the wake of divorce, drug addiction, affairs and eating disorders rubs salt in their wounds and ignores real entertainment news about events that actually have a tangible effect on the public, such as new movies worth seeing or albums worth listening to.
Can't we just leave them alone to regroup?
Clearly not.
Instead, we rush the down-and-out back into the limelight, but I can't figure out if it's because we want to see them succeed again or want to see them fail miserably. Maybe it's both.
Take Spears' cameo appearance Monday night on CBS's popular sitcom "How I Met Your Mother." As a fan of the show, all I can say is that I'm grateful that she was clearly a one-off character, and I resent that she was included in the show at all.
Her acting skills are poor, to be kind, and it's obvious her bit part, which could have been filled by any no-name actress and overshadowed an appearance from Sarah Chalke that might actually have some importance to the show's plot, was only intended to get her name out there for something other than being momentarily off her rocker.
Give it a rest. It's not my place to say when someone's career is over, but when a person's tribulations become more noteworthy than his or her work, it's time to take a break, not a cameo.
Alex Haueter is a senior news-editorial major. Reach him at alexhaueter@dailynebraskan.com.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Brian Thomas
posted 3/28/08 @ 3:18 PM CST
BREAD AND BUTTER MS/MR. NEBO(BRASKIN,
I suggest you get your desire to be on the top and the bottom a rest; you can always go back; for, I have discovered they both feel damned good!!
I bought Britney's most recent CD. (Continued…)
Post a Comment