Sponsored Links


Random Topics - Paparazzi

Paparazzi is the plural term (Paparazzo is the singular term) for independent photographers who take photographs of celebrities when they are unaware and caught off guard, usually when they are doing things such as dining at restaurants or shopping at stores. Because of their reputation as a nuisance, some states and nations have imposed restrictions and curfews against these photographers.

Wikipedia Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paparazzi
eBay Link: View Paparazzi on eBay

Boned When... (Login to Submit a Reason)

1 Caused Princess Diana's death Then took pictures of her instead of helping her
Please Login to Vote
2 They act like animals Will do anything to get the photograph they want
Please Login to Vote
3 Day 1 Sucked from the start.
Please Login to Vote
4 Most are Illegal Immigrants They took our jobs!
Please Login to Vote
5 Never Boned Still rocks.
Please Login to Vote

Paparazzi Comments (You must Login to Comment)

1 Poor losers stalking celebrities to make a buck. They're rumor-spreaders. They're like the fans who only care about getting an autograph from a celebrity, spin around and sell it for money on EBay. Otherwords, pieces of shit. -- Submitted By: (Infyrin) on February 18, 2014, 1:00 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
2 Halle Berry has helped implement tougher paparazzi laws in California. It's supposed to benefit celebrities' children. It must be obnoxious to seldom have any privacy but it kind of comes with the territory. I'm wondering if it will be considered a violation of 1st amendment rights. -- Submitted By: (Jp) on September 25, 2013, 9:17 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
3 Here's a thought: As we all know, hate-crime laws exist to add an extra bit of weight to a criminal sentence. (Beat someone up to steal his wallet, you get five years; beat him up because he's gay and you don't like gay people, you get ten years; and so on.) Wouldn't it be helpful if we had a sort of reverse hate-crime penalty scale which applied to these tabloid vultures? To whit: Beat up a regular person - five years; beat up a National Enquirer photographer who is harassing you and your family - $50 fine. End of problem. -- Submitted By: (Soggy9000) on April 30, 2011, 2:34 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
4 Paparazzi are the real-life equivalent of trolls on the Internet. As long as you buy those trashy tabloids or watch those "reality" shows, they'll never be out of a job. -- Submitted By: (BigAl) on July 11, 2010, 7:27 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
5 The Paparazzi are weeds. If you purchase tabloid magazines such as National Enquirer or watch celebrity gossip shows such as TMZ, you're supplying them with the fertilizer and water they need to grow. -- Submitted By: (Robert) on February 28, 2010, 1:18 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
6 MCS, that is the sad thing. That's all most of these people disgusted with the Paparazzi should do, don't buy this junk, yet what do they do? -- Submitted By: (PYLrulz) on February 27, 2010, 10:43 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
7 The only reason paparazzi are in business is because people are like lemmings and buy the magazines that they publish them in. If people didn't buy those they wouldn't be in business. I do have to echo the Princess Di comment too though. -- Submitted By: (MCS) on February 27, 2010, 11:51 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
8 I agree with Robert's last comment. I STILL think that each element of the paparazzi-publisher-consumer triad needs to be dissed! -- Submitted By: (Pelirojo) on September 12, 2009, 2:39 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
9 Thanks, that was exactly what I am trying to say. -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on September 11, 2009, 3:44 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
10 I don't think Swanpride is defending the Paparazzi, but is trying to get people to understand that it takes two to tango. Though the Paparazzi deserve blame, they're not the only ones who deserve it. Their "customers" are deserving of blame as well, for feeding the problem by buying this crap. And I agree, they do: anyone willing to do business with the Paparazzi or willing to buy something that requires their "skill" (and I use that term LOOSELY) is just as low as the Paparazzi themselves. The best cure to the disease that is the Paparazzi is to boycott tabloids and celebrity gossip. Uh oh, I just insulted disease by comparing it to the Paparazzi. -- Submitted By: (Robert) on September 11, 2009, 7:34 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
11 Did I write this? No, I didn't. I wrote that the ones who are complaining about Paparazzi should complain about the lack of a law against a breach of privacy in the USA. Because that would be the right place to change something. I also think that at least some of the complainers are reading the tabloids...they must or they couldn't know so much about the results of the Paparazzi "work". So if someone can absolut honestly say that he doesn't read the tabloids he can complain as much as he wants. But he should complain about the people who are reading the crab too. And about the newspapers who are printing the crab. -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on September 9, 2009, 6:45 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
12 Swanpride, Does the existance of hypocrites who decry paparazzi make nullify the rights of others to object to paparazzi's deplorable actions? Sorry, no. That doesn't fly with me! -- Submitted By: (Pelirojo) on September 9, 2009, 11:03 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
13 I have to respect the old-school paparazzo with the crazy tele-photo lens that patiently sets up a shot and gets a crazy scoop like Sienna Miller topless with her married co-star, or John Edwards secretly meeting with his mistress and bastard child. It's these new "Stalkerazzi" that need to just die. They're untalented, uneducated 3rd-world trash that just hang out outside celebrities' homes, hangouts, or airports shoving cameras in their faces when they appear. Does anybody care about Sharon Stone walking out of a restaurant? Why would anyone buy a picture like that? -- Submitted By: (Travoltron) on September 8, 2009, 7:28 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
14 I hear you...but my point is that the society is contributing to their ongoing existence. There are rules against meth labs. But there isn't a rule against taking a photo of a celebrity in their recreation time. If the society really had such a big problem with paparazzi, they would make a rule that privat photos of celebrities are only allowed when they show something of public interest (like said celebrity doing something illegal). But nobody tries to push for such a rule...everybody is whining about the thing the Paparazzi do, but nobody tries to do something, because in reality, most people want to see the fotos. It's this hypocricy which irks me (not that I say that everybody who voted "boned from the start" are reading tablebloids, but I bet at least some people do). -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on September 8, 2009, 3:31 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
15 Swanpride, Read my comments again since this will be my only repeat. I didn't say the paparazzi were SOLELY responsible for the vicious cycle of chasing down folks to profit from their exploitation (and, in fact, did not address Princess Diana's death at all), but I think to pretend that simply because others in the transaction contribute to this mess (tabloid employers, buying public) does NOT absolve their own guilt. Moreover, if they have the skill to photograph and write stories, they could use those for many purposes besides stalking celebs and their extended families (including minors and elderly relatives who did not ask to be part of this). As for Princess Diana, yes, the others you mentioned are partially responsible,too, but that doesn't negate the fact that the papazzi raced after her car through twisting downtown tunnels to get more photos (putting countless other drivers/pedestrians at risk)- when the whole world ALREADY knew she was dating Dodi Fayed so there was no motivation other than greed for more photos involved here. Therefore, they DO deserve to be dissed for their role in that senseless multiple accidental death. Also, many of them seem to taunt their targets to get reactions for the sole purpose of getting better photos/video to get more money. To say that they don't deserve criticism because they only are supplying a market makes as much sense as absolving meth lab operators while ignoring not only the human desecration of methamphetamines on users and their families/ colleagues but also the incredible amount of environmental havoc that their poison's production leaves behind! -- Submitted By: (Pelirojo) on September 8, 2009, 2:10 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
16 @Pelirojo Sure, they decided themselfes to do this job, but in the end, they are the symptom, not the illness. The whole Princess Diana story is a good example. Yes, the Paparazzi did their part in the whole tragedy. But they were not the only one. The newspapers are responsible for paying such a large sum for Princess Diana pictures. The public is responsible for lapping up the news about her. The chauffeur is responsible for drinking and especially for driving way to fast. Diana herself was responsible because she did not bother to fasten her seat-belt. But in the end, everyone was crying murder about the Paparazzi...and everyone was buying the latest news about her burial. People simply don't learn. -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on September 7, 2009, 1:27 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
17 I ignore celebrity gossip in the media, and I don't buy tabloids. Never have, never will, because it ensures the survival of the Paparazzi and people like them. Don't watch celebrity gossip on the TV, or read magazines like it, otherwise you'll just help breed those sub-scum Paparazzi creatures. Based on the opinions of the people here on Bone The Fish, I'm starting to see that celebrity gossip is getting less and less popular...and becoming more and more hated! -- Submitted By: (Robert) on September 7, 2009, 11:31 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
18 Swanpride, Gee, you think it's not possible for any of those paparazzi to think of another way to earn a living- like there's no cans for them to pick up where they live or they have no plasma to sell? While I grant that those who buy the tabloids and those who run them deserve to be dissed for each of their parts of the transaction that alone doesn't erase the culpability of the photo suppliers in seeking to blatantly profit by exploiting even the smallest semblence of privacy for those in their glares- often doing such mundane things as walking their dogs or picking up the mail in their driveways. -- Submitted By: (Pelirojo) on September 6, 2009, 6:35 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
19 Well, there werent any Paparazzi if there weren't papers who would pay for those shots. And the papers wouldn't pay if they wouldn't sell more papers with those shots. So in the end, those people who are buying this kind of crap to satisfy their curiousity about the privet life of celibrities are the ones who are really responsible. -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on September 6, 2009, 8:52 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
20 Pelirojo always say the best comments. i agree they kill princess Diana -- Submitted By: (shanequia) on August 30, 2009, 9:45 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote

Login to See the QUICK COMMENT Box


Log in to BTF

Register - Forgot password?

Follow on Twitter!

App on Facebook


Related eBay Auctions

Powered By: TempusMedia - (Page load took:0.148 seconds)