Traditionally, "Celebrity" was a by product of being "celebrated" in your sphere - as an actor, musician, writer etc. Implying that you were really good, people loved what you did and you became famous as a side-effect of this.
But in the UK the tabloids are currently blabbering on about:
Jade Goody : Famous for being on Big Brother and being a gobby chav.
Jade Goody's mum: Famous for being Jade Goody's mum
Peter Andre: Was a 90s popstar, now famous for being married to a topless model
Jodie March: Famous for getting her t.its out
Charlotte Church: Was a cute kiddie singer, now famous for drinking a lot and swearing on her rubbish "chat" show
Coleen McLoughlin and the other WAGS: Famous for dating footballers.
Danielle Lloyd: Famous for being a disqualified Miss UK and dating a footballer - and being a b.itch on Celeb Big Bruv
Jo O'Meara: has-been from a defunct pop group.
Is this just good publicity? Or do Brits genuinely love people who are famous for being famous?!
2007-02-23 23:26:54 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
No I don't get Paris Hilton either - famous for having more money than sense and subjecting people to her terrible attempts at singing and acting. Ouch!
2007-02-23 23:42:18 · update #1
Jayfire - great answer. These selfless folk are the people we should really be "celebrating" not self-obsessed Z-listers, desperate to eke out their 15 minutes of fame at all costs.
2007-02-24 00:16:49 · update #2
Bi-product of our media driven age. There are now so many television shows and channels, and pop culture magazines competing with each other, that they all need people to fill them in some way. If this means turning talentless nobodies into tinpot celebrities, then that's what they will do.
A zeitgeist of this decade is 'reality' television. Humankind seems to have a gladiatorial thirst for televised 'human nature stories' and 'human emotion.' A kind of car-crash TV which holds up a mirror to ourselves to say 'this is what real life is like.' No script writing or stage managing, this is 'reality' played out before us on our television screens, and media institutions always 'give the masses what they want.'
Sometimes this can be a good thing; if you watch X-Factor or such programmes right the way through, you feel as if you have 'been on a journey' with your favourite, and shared in their success. However, often it can be bad, as it can encourage us to set our aims erroneously low: It is as if to say that to be famous and successful these days, all you have to do is be thick, ignorant, abusive, chavvy, or sponge your rich spouse's money.
People made celebrities in this way are not good role models. They encourage people to become famous for negative reasons and not for anything positive and creative.
2007-02-23 23:43:58 · answer #1 · answered by The Global Geezer 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the true meaning of 'celebrity' has now been devalued, in the sense that reality tv shows have almost destroyed the essence of what makes a celebrity who they really are and our actual understanding of fame and being famous.
in response to your question, i have no idea why they are famous because to me they are not. i wouldn't call them celebrities. you don't call someone a celebrity, all because they appeared on a reality tv programme. being famous to me implies someone possessing some kind of talent and being extremely good at what they do for a living, without the need of going on some reality tv show. and the likes colleen, jade, jo, peter andre and jordan are remembered more for the fact they were on reality tv shows, as opposed to having talent and all those people you've mentioned, i cannot stand any of them. because in truth, it is either down to the fact that they really don't have many talents to showcase whatsoever so they go on these shows to impress or because they know they don't have much to offer and do it because they want the attention. in both cases, i find there attempts rather sad. and unfortunately, this wrongly sends out the message that anybody- no matter how talentless you are or however long you've been out of the media spotlight-that you can be famous, for not being that talented and in not being good at what you do. they are all trying to be a-list celebrity wannabe's -and yet they are really z-list has-beens
2007-02-23 23:51:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think "being famous" is a very relative term. I come from the central Europe and the only one I know from those above is Charlotte Church - but most people really don't know her in here as well.
Every country has their local stars (ex-Big Brothers, Pop Idol contestants, models etc) and the local tabloids can't get enough of talking about them and only those who are best at what they do can make it abroad with their fame.
So, are they really famous, those above - compared to Tony Blair or Paul McCartney? *wink*
(OK, now I have to admit that Pamela Anderson is probably very good at wearing her implants...or why the hell everybody on the whole planet knows her?)
2007-02-23 23:47:47 · answer #3 · answered by FantasticVoyage 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
AC/DC - TNT no longer many human beings comprehend that there replaced right into a TNT album that replaced into in simple terms launched in Australia, many followers think of the music TNT replaced into initially off the album intense voltage. It got here after intense voltage and previously grimy deeds performed airborne dirt and airborne dirt and dirt much less costly.
2016-10-16 09:23:12 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that Britain has gone crazy about wanting to know all the details about anyone that has appeared on TV more than once
It must be that we are just a nosy nation
2007-02-24 04:27:00 · answer #5 · answered by charlotte 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think you forgot some people what about ashlee simpson she can't sing and she's only famous cuz she's jessica's sister, Hilary Duff she can't sing and she was voted worst actress with her sister and what about nicole richie she's only famous cuz linole richie is her father. also lindsey lohan she can sing better than hilary and she's a good actress but she does drugs and stuff so she should lose her carrer. and those people are famous for no reason so i don't know why they are they suck.
2007-02-24 07:44:18 · answer #6 · answered by riotgerrl 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. People are celebrities for the dumbest reasons. I'd make a better celebrity than some of them, and I have no talent!!!
2007-02-24 03:08:42 · answer #7 · answered by Sarah* 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's the tabloid newspaper buying, crass t.v. watching, celebrity obsessed "sheep" that make those low life "celebrities" famous
If these morons stopped buying/watching that poxy, resource wasting garbage, rational people like ourselves wouldn't have to put up with their stupid faces emblazoned everywhere. Simple.
2007-02-23 23:45:52 · answer #8 · answered by fleshflayer 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Fame and talent are two very different things that tend to get intertwined to the point of losing their distinctions
2007-02-23 23:39:08 · answer #9 · answered by Fire Marshall Bill 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
At the moment it's fashionable to put non-entities on a pedestal if only for the fun of knocking them off it.
2007-02-23 23:31:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋