NationStates

Politicians have condemned press intrusion, calling for more regulation of both traditional and social media after the death of TV presenter Caroline Flack.

The former Love Island presenter is understood to have taken her own life on Saturday at her home in Islington, London. She had been charged with assaulting her partner and was due to stand trial in several weeks’ time.

Labour leadership contender Keir Starmer criticised mainstream outlets for “amplifying” damaging social media posts about Flack, and signalled he would take action to “diversify” the press if he won the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn.

The former director of public prosecutions said the presenter’s death “shocked a lot of people”, adding: “It wasn’t just social media, it was the media amplifying what social media was doing. It was both strands. There is a human impact.

“The press more widely have to take responsibility as well. Not just for the hatred and abuse but for the vilification constantly of Labour MPs and Labour leaders. We have got to do something to diversify our press, to have a better media.”

Fellow leadership contender Lisa Nandy said social media companies could not be left to police themselves, suggesting the current situation was like the “Wild West”.

“I worry about the approaches that say we allow the social media companies to regulate themselves,” she said. “In no other area of life would we allow private companies to police themselves. We ought to make sure the state has a system of regulation and support around that.”

So the media and social media are blamed here, and perhaps fairly so, though I do accept the simple fact that if people didn't click on these articles then perhaps the media wouldn't print them and people wouldn't get into such irate opinions over pointless things but..

..do the media have a responsibility not to amplify what are essentially non-newsworthy stories or..

..or should people not chase fame?

Andy Warhol famously said "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes", though it's getting to the point where 15 minutes of anonymity might be a better aspiration. The culture of fame is overwhelming, especially given the plethora of 'real life' TV shows, with wide parameters of what constitutes 'real life'. The news item above is about a presenter of a programme called 'Love Island', where random people go to an island and try to shag each other senseless.. brilliant. I chanced across a show on YT the other day called something like 'Come Dine with Me, where four people make meals for each other and are scored but it's so clearly apparent the producers try anything to get them to flirt or cause any form of interest at all.

One of my favourite actresses is Judy Garland, in part because her real life is in such stark contrast to the life portrayed to the public. Fame seems rarely glamorous, fraught with intrusions into your life, prone to addictions and mental health issues and, quite simply, placing you on a stand for the world of internet edge lords to write the most vicious things imaginable.

As Ricky Gervais noted, 'if you want fame for fame's sake, go murder someone', and frankly people already do?

Should fame be something to aspire to, is it more damaging than not - even if I take cinema, there's incredible actors doing amazing work in theater getting paid nothing, because we prefer our fake, popcorn munching, special effects, photoshopped stars blowing shit up - or is it something to strongly discourage in todays society.

Personally I think people should be careful for what they wish for, and fame is not a good wish.

What say ye NSG?

This is part of why, even when I hate the way the country is being governed, I couldn't really run for office. I don't know how people like Nancy Pelosi can handle all the hate they get.

Flack is a weirdly fitting name for that presenter.

I think the media does have a responsibility for what they cover and how they cover it, and people have a responsibility for how they react to stories that aren't their business -- but I also think people have a responsibility to think about how they are putting themselves out in the public eye. If you want people to watch you or listen to you, they're going to form opinions about you, and that just comes with the territory.

I think media -- especially online media -- should be more responsible, and shouldn't cover so many non-stories, like So-and-so's sex life, how Whoever became a size zero through eating lettuce and exercising twelve hours a day (or whatever the current fad is), is Whosit cheating on Thingummy -- or was their dinner with You-know-who really innocent? I think readers/viewers are partly to blame for having an insatiable interest in celebrity -- no matter whether someone is infamous for a killing spree or known for a reality TV series, or for being the next Bond girl. And the parties themselves for not being guarded over their personal lives and feeding that insatiable appetite.

I don't think fame should be courted; from all I've read about people who attained those dizzy heights of recognition, it doesn't seem to make people happy. I think people should get attention for the quality of their work, not salacious stories in red-top newspapers.

Of course, where that would leave the Kardashians et al., I leave to be judged by others...

Two years later, still waiting for someone to care about Carl Sargeant.

If I became famous, it would be a dream come true

This isn't really the media's fault. They need to give people what they want in order to survive, and this is the sort of thing we want. Our culture has become so obsessed with fame that we clearly don't seem to have any problem with intruding in anyone's life and forming an opinion about it because they're famous. To change the media, we would have to change that first.

Geneviev wrote:This isn't really the media's fault. They need to give people what they want in order to survive, and this is the sort of thing we want. Our culture has become so obsessed with fame that we clearly don't seem to have any problem with intruding in anyone's life and forming an opinion about it because they're famous. To change the media, we would have to change that first.

I think we've become obsessed with judging people, which has extended to judging anything and everyone.. Jon Ronson wrote a good book called 'So you've been publicly shamed', where even those not seeking fame suddenly become widely reviled entirely out of context.

However consciously seeking fame thinking it's a good thing.. in this day and age, people need to be really really careful about what they wish for. Beyond that it starts one to consider the morality of child fame, or any parent pushing their child to be famous. Seems littered with tragedy.

Bombadil wrote:

Geneviev wrote:This isn't really the media's fault. They need to give people what they want in order to survive, and this is the sort of thing we want. Our culture has become so obsessed with fame that we clearly don't seem to have any problem with intruding in anyone's life and forming an opinion about it because they're famous. To change the media, we would have to change that first.

I think we've become obsessed with judging people, which has extended to judging anything and everyone.. Jon Ronson wrote a good book called 'So you've been publicly shamed', where even those not seeking fame suddenly become widely reviled entirely out of context.

However consciously seeking fame thinking it's a good thing.. in this day and age, people need to be really really careful about what they wish for. Beyond that it starts one to consider the morality of child fame, or any parent pushing their child to be famous. Seems littered with tragedy.

I think, Eldest, that people have always judged others, it's just that our ability to do so has been greatly enhanced.

Bombadil wrote:

Geneviev wrote:This isn't really the media's fault. They need to give people what they want in order to survive, and this is the sort of thing we want. Our culture has become so obsessed with fame that we clearly don't seem to have any problem with intruding in anyone's life and forming an opinion about it because they're famous. To change the media, we would have to change that first.

I think we've become obsessed with judging people, which has extended to judging anything and everyone.. Jon Ronson wrote a good book called 'So you've been publicly shamed', where even those not seeking fame suddenly become widely reviled entirely out of context.

However consciously seeking fame thinking it's a good thing.. in this day and age, people need to be really really careful about what they wish for. Beyond that it starts one to consider the morality of child fame, or any parent pushing their child to be famous. Seems littered with tragedy.

Child fame gets really dangerous once it interferes with being a child. I think that causes a lot of the problems as well. The parents who do those things almost look abusive at times.

Farnhamia wrote:

Bombadil wrote:
I think we've become obsessed with judging people, which has extended to judging anything and everyone.. Jon Ronson wrote a good book called 'So you've been publicly shamed', where even those not seeking fame suddenly become widely reviled entirely out of context.

However consciously seeking fame thinking it's a good thing.. in this day and age, people need to be really really careful about what they wish for. Beyond that it starts one to consider the morality of child fame, or any parent pushing their child to be famous. Seems littered with tragedy.

I think, Eldest, that people have always judged others, it's just that our ability to do so has been greatly enhanced.

There are definitely more tools to do so. Now you can judge people you've never met, and tell them the extent to which you judge them, in real-time.

Infamy at the click of a button.

I would stop well short of saying I was ever 'famous' but as someone who was a public figure for a while (I made a few regular appearances on the news, wrote a column, etc.) I can tell you that it's dissuaded me from ever wanting to become properly famous.

The minute you put your head above the parapet, members of the public feel like they 'own' you and that you owe them and therefore must kowtow to their every whim and demand - lest you become the victim, as I have, of massive nasty social media campaigns and death threats for daring to have an opinion - or for simply daring to try and keep your personal life private.

Maybe it's different for people who became famous as entertainers, or who become rich as a result of fame (I'm definitely not rich) and maybe it's the fact that I was involved in the hyper-emotional and irrational world of politics but I certainly copped more than my fair share of abuse simply for being someone who worked behind the scenes for some politicians (and was never funded with public money, might I add) and who wrote the odd article or gave the occasional quote to the press once in a while.

My story has ended with me now being a virtual recluse - I have no social media presence, I don't go out in public if I can at all avoid it and aside from the occasional post on websites like this, where I'm anonymous I've reached a point where not only do I not desire fame, but if becoming a full-fledged hermit was to become an option, I'd happily take it.

I'd never want to be famous. Wealth and power would be nice, but not fame.

Particularly in our toxic age of social media.

Albrenia wrote:I'd never want to be famous. Wealth and power would be nice, but not fame.

Particularly in our toxic age of social media.

I don't log into social media other than NationStates, so I'm fine with a bit of fame.

And this is why media culture is evil. Always was and always will be. It's also why they should be forbidden from reporting on criminal cases in progress, reporting speculatively (making things up) and generally doing anything other than doing boring reports on the facts of a situation without any spin or embellishment.

NationStates is my own corner of fame, and I think I'll stop myself here.

It's always good to keep yourself on the down low, personally for me. Sure, I have some social network accounts here and there, but they're more for my own musings and stuff that I carefully consider before putting it there. I don't want to become too big - be it intentionally, unintentionally, or otherwise.

The bigger your fame... The harder a statement will hit. Sources and evidence be damned, you are screwed if someone played the rape accusation card on you, even if you're in the clear. It's hell on your nerves!

To paraphrase a Reddit post: Let me be the meanest bitch this side of the internet; I don't have to be the meanest bitch on the entire planet.

Geneviev wrote:

Bombadil wrote:
I think we've become obsessed with judging people, which has extended to judging anything and everyone.. Jon Ronson wrote a good book called 'So you've been publicly shamed', where even those not seeking fame suddenly become widely reviled entirely out of context.

However consciously seeking fame thinking it's a good thing.. in this day and age, people need to be really really careful about what they wish for. Beyond that it starts one to consider the morality of child fame, or any parent pushing their child to be famous. Seems littered with tragedy.

Child fame gets really dangerous once it interferes with being a child. I think that causes a lot of the problems as well. The parents who do those things almost look abusive at times.

If you read accounts by former child actors, there is a lot of abuse going on. Not all actors of course but -- some never wanted to be there, some had their entire earnings taken from them, some were flat out abused.... some were put on drugs to make them lose weight....

There should be a lot of people looking VERY closely at child actors' lives making sure they're as on board as their folks are.

Inside me there are two wolves fighting. One wolf is my narcississtic side, who would die for fame. One wolf is my depressed side, who would love to die forgotten and lonely.

The battle is constant, and the switch between who wins produces so much internal energy that it could power a medium sized country.

Inspiring to see that when someone has been driven to suicide, NSG concludes that it is her own fault for working in television in the first place. That's what one gets for chasing fame, apparently.

This is nothing new, trials have been bannered headlines for 100's of years. Folks have killed themselves over bad acts and the publicity fallout before. It is sad she is dead, but she took her own life, Zuckerberg didnt do it.

Edit: and giving politicians the right to regulate speech is a very bad idea

Its not such a big deal. Plenty of people can handle the media just fine. It is not as if the press is able to intrude too much into people's private lives. And in any case, most famous people are rich enough to afford a publicist and can thus outsource all of the grunt work of interacting with reporters or managing an online presence if they're so inclined.

Once you've reached too much success or have grown to a certain point, it is often worthwhile to have some outsourcing of tasks because time is too limited. It makes more sense to have the general public deal with the hired help whilst the person lives their life and does that is actually relevant to them in terms of their day.

Katganistan wrote:

Geneviev wrote:Child fame gets really dangerous once it interferes with being a child. I think that causes a lot of the problems as well. The parents who do those things almost look abusive at times.

If you read accounts by former child actors, there is a lot of abuse going on. Not all actors of course but -- some never wanted to be there, some had their entire earnings taken from them, some were flat out abused.... some were put on drugs to make them lose weight....

There should be a lot of people looking VERY closely at child actors' lives making sure they're as on board as their folks are.

People should be extremely careful with those children and be sure that none of those things are happening. I don't think anyone is really doing that now, and that is the problem. There should be people only responsible for the wellbeing of child actors.

Fame with money is fine.

Money without fame is fine.

Fame without money is brutal.

I have no idea who the dead person is and have no idea why they killed themselves. Anyone who aspires to fame should prepare themselves mentally and monetarily. You will have stalkers. You will get threats. You will be criticized. You will be vilified. You will lose friends and family.

Ifreann wrote:Inspiring to see that when someone has been driven to suicide, NSG concludes that it is her own fault for working in television in the first place. That's what one gets for chasing fame, apparently.

To be fair, it's not just NSG that says things like that.

https://twitter.com/Northyy001/status/9 ... 2481043456

When Carl Sergeant was accused of sexual misconduct, and took his own life, how did the internet react?

The fact he’s taken his own life proves his guilt. He’s massively fucked up somewhere & didn’t want to face the consequences

Stay classy, world.

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:I have no idea who the dead person is and have no idea why they killed themselves. Anyone who aspires to fame should prepare themselves mentally and monetarily. You will have stalkers. You will get threats. You will be criticized. You will be vilified. You will lose friends and family.

Basically, and keep in mind this is all allegedly, she was snooping in his phone and found text messages that she interpreted as him cheating while he was asleep.

Then she took a lamp and started beating him in the head with it.

He fought her back and called police, whereupon they showed and found them both covered in blood, saying that, and I quote the prosecutor "Both were covered in blood and in fact one of the police officers likened the scene to a horror movie."

Then she flipped over a table while in custody and had to be restrained.

So the crown prosecution service charged her, sheposted bail, and then almost immediately violated the conditions of her bail by contacting the victim.

And the internet being what it is, people started harassing her over it.

Then she committed suicide.

Galloism wrote:

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:I have no idea who the dead person is and have no idea why they killed themselves. Anyone who aspires to fame should prepare themselves mentally and monetarily. You will have stalkers. You will get threats. You will be criticized. You will be vilified. You will lose friends and family.

Basically, and keep in mind this is all allegedly, she was snooping in his phone and found text messages that she interpreted as him cheating while he was asleep.

Then she took a lamp and started beating him in the head with it.

He fought her back and called police, whereupon they showed and found them both covered in blood, saying that, and I quote the prosecutor "Both were covered in blood and in fact one of the police officers likened the scene to a horror movie."

Then she flipped over a table while in custody and had to be restrained.

So the crown prosecution service charged her, sheposted bail, and then almost immediately violated the conditions of her bail by contacting the victim.

And the internet being what it is, people started harassing her over it.

Then she committed suicide.

Thanks for info.

Sounds like there was an underlying mental issue at play. I dont know enough though so ill leave it at that.