Stars and Starr

Over two months ago I suggested that the government intervene in order to curb the dangerous and escalating behavior of the paparazzi. Well, it seems as if that may very well become a reality according to this article on CNN.com. And at the forefront of this alleged initiative is Ken Starr, who ironically was public enemy #1 amongst many liberal Hollywood types following his infamous Bill Clinton investigation.

My solution is admittedly radical, but I think lawmakers are on the right track by proposing a "safe zone" that photographers must adhere to. Even if you ignore the impact paparazzi have on celebrities, it's hard to deny that some instances -- in particular, but not limited to, the extreme examples -- become a general public safety issue. As referenced in the article, if Britney Spears is stopped at a traffic light and her car is swarmed by paparazzi, every other car in that area is now at risk.

While writing this entry, I also came across another article about how France has strict laws regarding the paparazzi, especially when it comes to photographing children. There was an interesting distinction I thought I'd include:

"Let's say [Angelina Jolie] went to the French Open with her children, I would say, 'she's out in public and knows she'll be seen, there's no reason to ban the photo,' " said lawyer Daphne Juster, who regularly defends photographers. "But if she's strolling in the park in sunglasses, minding her own business, she could say, 'I tried to be discreet, this is not part of my public life,' and can sue."

I know that this quote refers to the strict French laws, and thus is not entirely relevant to my upcoming point, but -- and this might surprise some -- to a certain degree, I disagree with this statement. As I said in my original post, while celebrities' rights should not be violated, they shouldn't receive special treatment either. In my opinion, if a celebrity is walking down the street or shopping for groceries, people, whether they're paparazzi or simply an enamored fan, have every right to take a photograph. My issue is when paparazzi get so caught up on snapping these pictures that they create a disturbance that results in a dangerous environment, or if they're attempting to photograph somebody on their private property.

That is why I agree with the notion of a "safe zone." It doesn't prevent the paparazzi from taking their photos, but it respects the personal space of the celebrities and the safety of innocent bystanders. One might argue that they won't get that "money shot" of Angelina Jolie's just-born twins, or of Britney Spears with broccoli in her teeth, or of Miley Cyrus picking her nose, but at some point somebody has to take a stand and say that the ends don't justify the means.