PDA

View Full Version : Celebrity mishaps. Why do we care? - Pop culture in the news


Patchisou Yutohru
October 25th, 2011, 03:21 PM
This mainly deals with the news (in terms of noteworthy information) rather than pop culture, so that's why I'm posting it here instead of culture and media.

Every time I turn on the news, I see something about a celebrity being discussed. I think that's fine for morning news (as long as it's limited to about a minute) but has absolutely no place for News at 5 segments.

I feel that that time should be used for more pressing matters than what a celebrity is doing on the other side of the country, who got sent to jail for whatever reason on the other side of the country, and the like. Save things like that for the Twitter, blogs, and gossip communities and focus your attention towards delivering news that affects the community.

If I wanted to know Lindsey Lohan's dad was arrested for domestic violence and why that's so important or that Lindsey Lohan is back in jail or was late to her community service, I would have tuned into Entertainment Weekly. Not the news. It really makes me wonder what the news has become.

Is the news like this where you live? Do you think pop culture has a place in the news?

2Cool4Mewtwo
October 25th, 2011, 03:51 PM
Perhaps #1 reason why I hate many celebrities.

JB: Ok, he's a singer, but he's not the singer of the generation or anything...
rebecca black: don't even get me started.
Kim kardashian: What the **** has she actually done to get so much attention?

...yeah. :(

psyanic
October 25th, 2011, 04:23 PM
The local news station where I live doesn't really focus on celebrities as much as sports. The cover sports a lot but that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that they literally copy something from ESPN or some other sports show and say the exact same things they say, and call it their own.

However, they do at times talk about celebrities. And it's stupid. If I wanted to know about some singer getting arrested for drunk driving, I'd watch ET. Personally, I don't care about celebrities. Pop culture doesn't really need a place on the news. Their publicity is already wide enough, moving from movie trailers to songs on iTunes or TV shows.

Oryx
October 25th, 2011, 04:28 PM
When I do watch news, I watch local news, I feel like it tends to get rid of a lot of what people complain about the most on the news. It's not really trying to sway me any one way (other than to love the Eagles and Phillies because lol Philadelphia), and it doesn't really care for celebrities. It only covers national news if it's huge, mostly stuff local to Philadelphia and South Jersey.

The problem is, News at 5 has to compete with other programs that entertain, over them whose job it is to just...report the news. They have to find a way to get in the people that normally would instead turn to a reality show or some other thing at that time of night, there are so many options for television. So I see news as the opposite tbh; morning news should focus on the news of the past day and such, as well as weather, traffic, etc. It shouldn't have celebrity news. Evening news programs should be the ones to handle all that.

cacturne4512
October 25th, 2011, 04:29 PM
Oh god. I remember when Bieber got a haircut. That was the effin' top story for my local news station. I am the kind of person who watches ET and those shows, but those stories belong on those shows. Not the main news station for the area.

Aizuke
October 25th, 2011, 04:48 PM
I don't really see why they need to put celebrity news in newspapers and TV news, when they have their own shows and magazines designated to the "juicy gossip". It's pretty ridiculous and I tend to think whenever there's an article or news story about a celebrity, it's a pretty slow news day. Although, living in the capital of Australia, I don't see much gossip in the newspaper, well at least not about celebrities. Unless politicians count as celebrities?

That being said, news about celebrities don't really interest me and most of the stories are more hyped than if just a "normal" person was in the same situation, only because it's a well known person. I don't really care if a celebrity went to jail for drink driving, or goes back to rehab because of their drug abuse. It's not like they're the only people in the whole wide world who does those things, and yet if a person who's not famous did the same things, no one would ever hear a word about it. Why? Because it's just not that important.

I doubt that if a celebrity went to a jail, my life would turn upside and bring chaos to the world. I suppose Australia isn't so bad with the celebrity news, compared to what I saw when I was in America.

-ty-
October 25th, 2011, 06:02 PM
Perhaps #1 reason why I hate many celebrities.

JB: Ok, he's a singer, but he's not the singer of the generation or anything...
rebecca black: don't even get me started.
Kim kardashian: What the **** has she actually done to get so much attention?

...yeah. :(

Why do you hate people you have never met?
Although I do not like Justin Beiber's music; I can not say whether or not he is a good guy. Same with Kim Kardashian, although she doesn't have any particular talents aside from modeling/socialite, I don't think that I could say she is a person I hate. Hate is just such a strong word...

Anyways, I think that celebrities are of "human interest". Since they are human interests, I do not see why it is such an apalling thing to have them in the news. Politics and local/state/national/world events are not the only things that are of human interest. Sports, weather, fashion, television/movies, music, science, and several other things that are human interests. Who are the ones that decide whether or not something should be broadcast on the news? The viewers are. Simply because something is not important or of interest to someone does not mean it is not important or of interest to someone else.

For me, when sports come up I am like, "boring. who cares?" Well, obviously someone cares, or sports would not be included in the news; I would never want to exclude sports from the news simply because it has no importance to me.

marz
October 25th, 2011, 06:17 PM
This mainly deals with the news (in terms of noteworthy information) rather than pop culture, so that's why I'm posting it here instead of culture and media.

Every time I turn on the news, I see something about a celebrity being discussed. I think that's fine for morning news (as long as it's limited to about a minute) but has absolutely no place for News at 5 segments.

I feel that that time should be used for more pressing matters than what a celebrity is doing on the other side of the country, who got sent to jail for whatever reason on the other side of the country, and the like. Save things like that for the Twitter, blogs, and gossip communities and focus your attention towards delivering news that affects the community.

If I wanted to know Lindsey Lohan's dad was arrested for domestic violence and why that's so important or that Lindsey Lohan is back in jail or was late to her community service, I would have tuned into Entertainment Weekly. Not the news. It really makes me wonder what the news has become.

Is the news like this where you live? Do you think pop culture has a place in the news?

It seems weird but sometimes there just aren't enough news segments to fill the gap. In most cases you won't find celebrity news unless you've tuned into Entertainment Weekly. I mean, I dunno, that's what it's like for the news in Toronto, we almost never get updated about celebrities.

Pop culture does have a place in the news. If there are events happening where several artists are playing a festival - just like the MuchMusic Festival every July in Toronto - and they want to spread the word out, a quick segment is perfectly reasonable. But when it comes to Lindsay once again being charged with public drunkenness and drug possession, that's nowhere near interesting nor worth a segment, especially when the stories following that are of something important, like for example the Occupy Wall Street protests and what's coming out of those.

Esper
October 26th, 2011, 11:18 AM
It's easier to understand celebrity mishaps. They're simple things, things you could potentially relate to, that don't require your full attention or any knowledge of the world. Is the average person going to want to watch a news piece on someone's wardrobe malfunction or elections in a country they can't even find on a map?

It doesn't help that a lot of news is bad news - at least here in America - which is meant to scare you as much as it is inform you. Too much bad news can turn people off of from watching the news so they throw in a little schadenfreude to make you feel better. Or they just focus on something popular to make you feel better/forget about the bad stuff.

I wish news was more... newsy, less pop-cultural-y, but I can understand the need to get people engaged. It's a fine line, I think, between enough to get people's attention and neglecting the primary role of the news.

Alley Cat
October 26th, 2011, 03:39 PM
I honestly don't know why the media puts so much attention on celebrities. I guess it is because they are to be our role-models. But also because, people know celebrities. I'm sure you much rather hear about what happened to <insert favorite artist's name here> when they got arrested for a DUI than you would rather hear about "local New York citizen John Doe gets DUI.

Pop-culture can have it's spot in the news. But there are such simple things(such as x artist getting a DUI) that I just don't really care about. The people who do care? They can go out of their way to find out. Now, hearing something meaningful about a celebrity isn't that bad. The difference being "Brittany Spears arrested for DUI" and "Amy Winehouse dead due to alcohol."

Just remember, they are celebrities because we are interested in their lives. Just because they sing, or play a sport, or maybe acted in a movie once, they aren't a celebrity.

Sodom
October 26th, 2011, 07:23 PM
When two friends get together, they discuss the latest events that happen in their lives. If they have mutual friends, they also discuss any news pertaining to them. If their mutual friend is pregnant or had a DUI, that would be considered news. A celebrity is somebody who everybody knows, so putting the events that happen in their lives on the news is really just this same thing on a larger scale.

Mr Cat Dog
October 27th, 2011, 02:25 AM
When two friends get together, they discuss the latest events that happen in their lives. If they have mutual friends, they also discuss any news pertaining to them. If their mutual friend is pregnant or had a DUI, that would be considered news. A celebrity is somebody who everybody knows, so putting the events that happen in their lives on the news is really just this same thing on a larger scale.
But presumably you'd never broadcast your friend's pregnancy/DUI/whatever on a national/international scale the way news reports do about certain celebrities?

2Cool4Mewtwo
October 27th, 2011, 03:14 PM
Why do you hate people you have never met?
Although I do not like Justin Beiber's music; I can not say whether or not he is a good guy. Same with Kim Kardashian, although she doesn't have any particular talents aside from modeling/socialite, I don't think that I could say she is a person I hate. Hate is just such a strong word...

Anyways, I think that celebrities are of "human interest". Since they are human interests, I do not see why it is such an apalling thing to have them in the news. Politics and local/state/national/world events are not the only things that are of human interest. Sports, weather, fashion, television/movies, music, science, and several other things that are human interests. Who are the ones that decide whether or not something should be broadcast on the news? The viewers are. Simply because something is not important or of interest to someone does not mean it is not important or of interest to someone else.

For me, when sports come up I am like, "boring. who cares?" Well, obviously someone cares, or sports would not be included in the news; I would never want to exclude sports from the news simply because it has no importance to me.
Maybe it doesn't apply to you, but problem is, they get too much attention. Whenever I walk through giant™ (one I use the most) or some other supermarket, on the shelf of magazines (which I ALWAYS walk by), about 95% of the junk there are supermodels, and 100% of the time I can see that kardashian ***** with a fake smile. Every time I am disgusted by it. Hey, maybe you don't see them on YOUR supermarkets, but I do on mine. Maybe I'm "unlucky," but it's hardly a coincidence if I can see that 95% (5% being TIME (mainly) or some other useful stuff) of magazine shelf is filled with celebrity junk.

I know that Yahoo News is known for its junk, but hey, look what I found. (http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/286/lolwtfi.png) How is that a useful information in anyway? Is bieber going to come to our house and turn his "batmobile" into a solid gold or something?

Rebecca Black.... I know she isn't in the news as often as above two, but.....

(all caps/rage warning)
EVERY SINGLE ****ING DAY I CAN ****ING HEAR SOMEBODY SINGING OR REITERATING THIS SONG. EVERY SINGLE ****ING DAY. MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!! :(

But hey, I'll never be able to convice you if you have different opinions. It's like trying to convince a piece of brick to carve itself into a Statue of Liberty or something stupid like that. If I can't convince you in any way, maybe we'll have to agree to disagree.

Gold warehouse
October 27th, 2011, 03:23 PM
It's no less worthy of being news than most of the other stories they have on there. Unless there's a major disaster or political event, isn't the news just gossip? Is it really important for us to know about the latest murder, robbery or child abuse story? Even if it is relatively major political event, it's always played up to the point of being gossip. I don't really find it fun to have Gaddafi's corpse shoved in front of my face all day.

I go onto the BBC news site if I want a good laugh, not for anything else.

Sodom
October 27th, 2011, 07:10 PM
But presumably you'd never broadcast your friend's pregnancy/DUI/whatever on a national/international scale the way news reports do about certain celebrities?

No, because my friend wouldn't be known nationally or internationally lol. That's my point, it's the same thing but on a larger scale. I'm not saying it's right as far as the issue of privacy-invasion goes, but I'm just saying that's the reason it is done.

-ty-
October 27th, 2011, 08:01 PM
Maybe it doesn't apply to you, but problem is, they get too much attention. Whenever I walk through giant™ (one I use the most) or some other supermarket, on the shelf of magazines (which I ALWAYS walk by), about 95% of the junk there are supermodels, and 100% of the time I can see that kardashian ***** with a fake smile. Every time I am disgusted by it. Hey, maybe you don't see them on YOUR supermarkets, but I do on mine. Maybe I'm "unlucky," but it's hardly a coincidence if I can see that 95% (5% being TIME (mainly) or some other useful stuff) of magazine shelf is filled with celebrity junk.

I know that Yahoo News is known for its junk, but hey, look what I found. (http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/286/lolwtfi.png) How is that a useful information in anyway? Is bieber going to come to our house and turn his "batmobile" into a solid gold or something?

Rebecca Black.... I know she isn't in the news as often as above two, but.....

(all caps/rage warning)
EVERY SINGLE ****ING DAY I CAN ****ING HEAR SOMEBODY SINGING OR REITERATING THIS SONG. EVERY SINGLE ****ING DAY. MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!! :(

But hey, I'll never be able to convice you if you have different opinions. It's like trying to convince a piece of brick to carve itself into a Statue of Liberty or something stupid like that. If I can't convince you in any way, maybe we'll have to agree to disagree.


Exactly, many people dislike politicians/politics; they do not want to hear about the latest scandal/decision/personal life information about Obama, Sarah Palin, John Edwards, Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and the list goes on. Just because one person finds that information invaluable, doesn't mean that it should not be available to those that do find it valuable. Should we take out news coverage of the 2012 debates and other political articles because some do not find it interesting? The same applies to celebrity news coverage; many people find it valuable.

If you don't like music/celebs/pop culture, then do not buy the magazine. If Justin Beiber is on E! or Fox News, and you do not like hearing about him, then change the channel; there are numerous news channels and internet news sources to select from with a wide-variety of stories. No one has the right to say that celebrities should be segregated from the news.
And again, I still do not understand how you can hate people that you have never met; really, why do people HATE Justin Beiber. I mean, I do not like his music, but he has never done anything like murder, rape, assault, or theft, so why do you have hatred for him?

Harley Quinn
October 27th, 2011, 08:28 PM
Have you guys ever watched the movie Network? It covers this topic quite nicely, not in the celebrity mishap sense, but how TV networks will do whatever it takes to get ratings. This is the reason why the celebrity stories are in the headlines, because people are interested in them and they'll get good ratings in the news. Prime example being Michael Jackson. His later life was one huge media circus and the ratings that the news stations must have gotten whenever they were broadcasting another event in the CRAZY LIFE OF MJ must have been crazy.