The Paris Hilton debate: Readers vs. The Rage

Ed Note: Yesterday, I posted below that Paris Hilton's movie bombed and hence, her overexposure had finally done her in. Many readers responded here by pummeling me for even posting about Hilton. A few even accused me of being on her publicity payroll.

Look, I'm disgusted by the popularity of Paris Hilton. When I see a picture of a young girl waiting in line to have her picture taken with a woman best known for a sex tape, I want to jump off a building. But I would also love to know what drives you to seek out these stories in the first place? The Times' coverage of Paris Hilton's arrest was our #1 story in 2007. The Britney Spears coverage and Heath Ledger stories are widely read too. Are we the media acting as the horse or the cart? And if we are the horse and the cart, aren't you all feeding us the hay?

This week, the billboard on the corner of Sunset and Highland boulevards is entirely devoted to Paris Hilton. You catch her coming and going.  One side endorses her new shoe line and calls her "the most talked about celebrity." Is that really a good thing? The flip side is an ad for "The Hottie & the Nottie," a movie that critics have collectively crushed like a clove of garlic.  The film made just $9,000 last night when it opened. Her weekly Fred Segal bill is probably twice that amount.

Is Paris Hilton officially passe? It would seem so and The Rage suspects that she did herself in with her own ubiquity. From pouting at Sundance premieres to pouting at Super Bowl parties, the heiress seems to be everywhere at once. Plus, she hawks handbags, hamburgers, perfume, Prosecco and now a line of footwear. Maybe Paris is getting tired of herself too? The woman known for changing outfits every hour wore the very same tacky pink headband to both her shoe launch and the People pre-Grammy party later that night.

Photos: WireImage

Comments

[Christine]

Think about it? Why is it that LA Times keeps tagging you to write about Paris Hilton? Maybe the newspaper heads are trying to tell you something about how they view you as a "writer" and "journalist"? Is this how you want your career to turn out?

If you tell me you choose to write about Paris Hilton, then you just don't have a clue about being a serious ournalist, if this is your career goal. Having this type of "work" in your portfolio will only harm your career.

If you are aspiring to be an entertainment writer, then keep doing what you are doing. This is the type of stuff the entertainment media earn their bread and butter off of.

[JD Brewer]

Hey leave off the writer. It is what it is. Women have done much worse things to make a buck and she is right---YOU people clicked onto the story in the first place. Get over yourselves. Paris is the poster child for useless people. She knows it. I know it. You know it. Wheres the beef?

[THE RAGE]

Thanks for input. Just to clarify, I was not feeling defensive when I posted the addendum -- I think it's a topic worth discussing, debating, and -- according to scrappy hula girl and g.mulleer -- some verbal KOs.
And for the record, my comment about her headband was supposed to be funny, not a fashion criticism.

[Paul]

It's amazing how many people took the time to post about how they don't care and aren't interested in Hilton. Talk about hypocrisy. You're here posting, aren't you?

Hilton stories are routinely the most heavily viewed on the LA Times website. That's why you see more stories about her: They're feeding people what they want.

[Hula Girl]

Hey Rage,

You're alright. In a town of massive egos and stratospheric insecurity, you handled this controversy with aplomb.

I can see you are a survivor. Good luck with your writing.

[tom]

Before I moved to LA I used to question the value placed on actors, singers, and entertainers in general. I used to think that a physicist, a doctor, a teacher or guy that works at a homeless shelter was of more value and importance than say Julia Roberts or Dave Grohl. Making a big deal out of the death of Heath Ledger would have made as much since to me making a big deal out of the hundreds of 20 something year olds that OD every year.

But now after living here for a few years, I now realize that entertainers and celebrities are the most important people in the world. How else can you explain their wealth and the adoration poured upon them?

We need to continue to celebrate them and learn about them because without them we are nothing.

[emily]

We're in the proverbial catch-22 aren't we? Media gauges the public's habits of viewing, clicking, buying and paying, and sees that we want to leer at Paris/Nicole/Britney/Lindsay/Name the Useless Starlet. Public realizes that this sucking sound we hear is our intelligence going down the toilet, and we pretend that the blame can be placed solely on the media. I think both sides have to declare that we're finished -- the public needs to stop watching the shows, visiting the web sites and buying the magazines and products, and the media needs to stop pandering and start ignoring people who add nothing to the collective good. Now, who will step up and go first?

[Big Fella]

We will always have a Paris Hilton, a Paris Hilton is a necessary tool of capitalist marketeers to keep us either occupied with mindless entertainment or shopping and not thinking about war or anything else serious that impacts human life.

http://indefatigable-indolence.org/blog1/2007/03/13/is-paris-burning-who-cares/