# do they bring it on themselves?

Category: Let's talk

## Post 1 by sugarbaby (The voice of reason) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 6:55:54

Well on the weekend the news of the world (one of the UK's less intelectual tabloids) published the accounts of the Beckham's ex nanny as to what is really going on in their marriage. For once the sympathy vote actually seemed to have falled on Victoria which makes a novel change. The story was allowed to be printed, despite the fact that the Beckhams tried to take out an injunction preventing the paper from printing the story. The judge allowed it to be printed because he said that it was "in the public interest" for the story to be printed.
Well apart from the fact that according to a pole on radio 5 live this morning only 4% of the public could care less about what the beckhams do in their private lives, do these celebrities bring it all on themselves? After all, David and victoria constantly trade on the Beckham brand, they constantly sell bits of their personal life (pictures of their wedding, the births of their babies etc) to various trashy tabloids and tacky magazines. So is it only fair that they can't have one without the other? after all, if they're happy to sell the good bits, surely it's only to be expected that if the bad bits become public knowledge, those will be published as well?

## Post 2 by Stefan (Generic Zoner) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 7:37:44

well exactly. they chose to be famous and to put themselves into the public spotlight. with the good has to come some element of bad so they should just deal with it. people don't just want to see what other people choose to show them

## Post 3 by Senior (I've now got the bronze prolific poster award! now going for the silver award!) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 8:24:45

It seems that sometimes they'll try hard to get the attention of the media, like when everything is going well, they just don't like the bad things being released. I think the media are more interested than the audience.

## Post 4 by sugarbaby (The voice of reason) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 8:43:52

well to a degree I agree ww, however, if there weren't people out there who are prepared to pay for it, then the media wouldn't go to the lengths they do to get the stories.

## Post 5 by Resonant (Find me alive.) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 12:26:30

It's hard to feel sorry for those like Victoria, who've made a career of being a celebrity, but there are those who are great at what they do, great artists/musicians/actors/scientists/writers who have become celebrities as a result, who consistently shun the tabloids and who still have their private lives aired when they're juicy enough. And you have to feel sorry to those born into the spotlight, like royals and children of superstars, who will be hounded all their lives purely on the grounds of an association which has nothing to do with their own achievements or their wishes. I wouldn't trade with them for all the A-list invites and free designer labels in the world.

## Post 6 by Goblin (I have proven to myself and the world that I need mental help) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 12:31:34

ohh please who really cares...how far up the scale far do these eejits rate hmmm? talk about scraping the bottom of a very scummy barrel

## Post 7 by sugarbaby (The voice of reason) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 12:36:48

ah but someone obviously cares because people buy it, and newspapers pay hundreds of thousands of pounds for it, they wouldn't if they didn't think someone would pay money to read it.

## Post 8 by Goblin (I have proven to myself and the world that I need mental help) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 13:20:05

such empty headed eejits would buy beckham's filthy sweaty underwear if they thought it was genuine...

## Post 9 by wildebrew (We promised the world we'd tame it, what were we hoping for?) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 13:23:18

eeehm I almost agree but I think the chances of Victoria's filthy underwear being sold for high prices are slightly higher, ever so slightly at any wait.

## Post 10 by sugarbaby (The voice of reason) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 13:24:22

oooh what a horrible thought.

## Post 11 by Senior (I've now got the bronze prolific poster award! now going for the silver award!) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 14:06:07

It may not necessarily be that readers of these tabloids buy them to read about the Beckhams. There are a lot of other features which readers may find interesting and want to read so they buy the paper. I think that it is wrong to assume that people by papers because they're interested in things like the Beckhams marriage. This is the arguement the tabloids always use, but as people don't give the reasons for buying a particular paper and surveys don't appear to be conducted on these reasons, noone really knows how many people bought the tabloid for the news on the Beckhams marriage and how many bought it for other reasons.

## Post 12 by wildebrew (We promised the world we'd tame it, what were we hoping for?) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 14:10:09

Oh ww, I am sure that the marriage of the Beckhams is a large selling point, it's the main story of the issue it's the one advertized and if it increases the sale of such a magazine it is the contributing factor, and if you consider the rest of the material in the tabloids eehm well the large majority of it is in fact similar stories about other people. Also look at the whole industry that has been bult up about pvoridinv this type of information and gozzip to the public, there is a reason for it, it's money, it's money that the public is willing to pay for the gozzip stories, there's absolutely no chance that this isn't the case because there could be no other incentive for spending so much money on contracts and pictures and paparazzi journalists and photographers and just look at the success of e.g. the Osbornes if you don't believe me.
Cheers
-B

## Post 13 by sugarbaby (The voice of reason) on Monday, 25-Apr-2005 15:36:42

apparently the sales of heat magazine increased by 25% when victoria Beckham was on the front cover

## Post 14 by Goblin (I have proven to myself and the world that I need mental help) on Tuesday, 26-Apr-2005 9:51:08

the staff in care homes, really need to keep a wary eye on what these vulnerable people are reading, they lack the mental capacity to cope with such crap...

## Post 15 by Senior (I've now got the bronze prolific poster award! now going for the silver award!) on Tuesday, 26-Apr-2005 12:25:33

That would be because men like looking at women like her. Yeah some ae interested in what the Beckhams do and such similar gossip will sell papers, but if it weren't included, those papers would still sell because they could advertise other things as their main story.

## Post 16 by wildebrew (We promised the world we'd tame it, what were we hoping for?) on Tuesday, 26-Apr-2005 12:51:56

ww, but those other things would be things of the same nature and if the only selling point of the paper wre pictures of women then porno magazines or underwear catalogues would outsell gozzip magazines by a large factor and I do believe this is not the case.
cheers
-B

## Post 17 by kgs4674forever (Zone BBS is my Life) on Tuesday, 26-Apr-2005 16:19:27

Yes, i do think they bring it all on themselves. after all, they do all htese crazy things and they wonder why they get bad raps in the press?

## Post 18 by sugarbaby (The voice of reason) on Friday, 29-Apr-2005 7:56:00

well apparently the beckhams are today taking their ex nanny to court to try and get an injunction to prevent her saying any more - apparently she signed a confidentiality agreement when she came to work for them. but he said, when you take someone into your house, to look after your children, your most treasured possessions ... "possessions", children are not possessions, yet I think that to some of these celebrities I think that's exactly what they are. pretty sad ...