Shaun Rapkowicz: All somebody has to do is to get some sort of coverage today from the ever expanding media in order to be considered a celebrity (many of them I've barely heard of yet they are considered "celebrities"). In the past, being a celebrity inferred that you had "made your mark" on the world, that even if you had been recognized for one thing, at least that was a thing of some importance to the general public.
Coralie Goldsberry: hell yeain the past is was all about talent and being your bestnow its just about the parties, getting on the cover of a magazine, filthy rich parents that can afford anything, and for some its because your soo hot you could be a porn star
Matt Tiry: In answer to your question, remember in the past we didn't have paparazzi as such. I am speaking (of course) of the 19th century. Then in the 20th century we did have press and photographers, but their (more) aggressive nature wasn't apparent until the end of the 20th centur! y and the advent of better 'instant' technology (ie: digital technology and the ability to instantly spread the picture around the globe). Generally, that is part of your answer. Celebrity in the past meant someone had an 'accomplishment', like an artist or explorer (Lindbergh would be a great example). Now all it takes to be a celeb is to be an empty-headed heiress with a penchant for sleeping with everyone, flashing her genitalia, and saying stupid things....Show more
Ricky Frazer: Liberal, Environmental Activist, Scientologist, Annoying.
Leann Villalta: before it was talent & grace now drugs & partys
No comments:
Post a Comment