But bad publicity doesn't necessarily pay the rent or does it? I knew I should have taken those acting classes when mom told me to. :(
2007-02-17 06:21:27 · 12 answers · asked by Kooties 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
In the world of celebrities - yes, bad publicity can pay the bills if you know how to work it and spin it. Anna Nicole got some of the worst publicity, which was the only thing that kept her in the public eye. But a star that gets a lot of bad press about being hard to work with does eventually stop getting offers.
In all other areas of life, I don't think bad publicity is any good at all.
And it is always a good idea to take classes that a parent suggests, because often they will pay for it and encourage us when we take their advice. We are stubborn and want to do it our own way - and 3 years later we find that allowing them to do that nice thing for you would have been very helpful.
Peace!
2007-02-17 06:26:06 · answer #1 · answered by carole 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bad Publicity Is Better Than No Publicity, Unless You'Re Jacko hahahahaha
2007-02-17 06:23:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
How come? Anna Nicole had nothing BUT negative publicity. Or, take Miserosoft - not a single good program in history, nothing but bugs and security flaws, everyone's complaining, so Gates is the richest sort-of-man out there. Look at all the papers, web sites, TV news... today - bald & fat Britney gets tatoos... or the Hilton sl.ut...
2007-02-17 06:26:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess that depends on what is important to you? Your image, maybe. I would rather not be known for a sleaze bad so I guess I would stick with the good publicity or none at all.
2007-02-17 06:24:33 · answer #4 · answered by Evee 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no count number how plenty money they get they consistently must be interior the spotlight!! Please!! the information and articles are all approximately "the celebrities" and how unhappy they're, Boohoo! each physique is going via crap they do exactly no longer make it public! quite of all the 'stunning hollywood stars' spending money on huge legal experts, exposure & fancy automobiles, Donate it to those who certainly choose help, The starvation, The homeless, The disabled, ill little ones, those each physique is in plenty greater choose of "exposure" yet "the spectacular hollywood pathetics" are consistently wanting the attention of the international, relatively i do no longer care paris Hilton made a intercourse tape, i certainly do no longer care L.Lohan is in prison & i do no longer care approximately 'Mel Gibsons' inner maximum existence the two!! you all choose severe scientific care & a slap around the face, Stuff your exposure!!!
2016-10-15 12:54:16 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
lol @ using Anna Nicole Smith as an example....her son's dead, she's dead and her baby daughter has 5 dads so clearly the bad publicity took its toll on her.
No publicity is way better.
2007-02-17 06:30:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would rather be poor and respected, which I am than Rich and not. I guess it all depends on the priorities we set for ourselves.
2007-02-17 06:24:38 · answer #7 · answered by whattheheck 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, if you can't pay your rent, go down on the corner.I bet you got something men like to sell. If you did not listen to mama, listen to me.
2007-02-17 06:24:30 · answer #8 · answered by makemeyourloverhun 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Always
2007-02-17 06:28:37 · answer #9 · answered by Akbar B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmmn that sounds like a personal problem
Is this one of those political questions..lol..
2007-02-17 06:25:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋