Hacked Celebrity Photos

[P-Jay]

Mr_B said:

P-Jay said:

Negative media attention / over zealous attention from 'fans' is a very obvious downside to being an actor / singer / celebrity however you want to call it - it EXACTLY like a solder being hurt, although despite the others bleat about it, it's not nearly as bad - it's an unintended consequence of someone's job / lifestyle.

I refer to the money side at the risk of stating the obvious not many people who have been affected by this, if any, need to carry on being a celebrity to feed themselves etc, if fame is suddenly so terrible, they can stop being famous relatively quickly by simply turning off the PR machine.

I'm no more jealous than anyone else if they're honest, I just think that like everyone they should accept the rough with the smooth - they've reached the top of an industry that literally millions of people try to break into, they can demand huge amounts of money for their efforts, have thousands of people scream their names if they and go to places 99.99% of the global population can't - but if they're foolish enough to take naked pictures of themselves and put them on the internet, don't be surprised if they're found they'll be carried around the world by the exact same force of momentum that got them where they are today.

I'm still not sure why you think illegal acts are just tough luck and because of the money such people make it something lesser.
Who else gets the tough luck act for suffering illegal acts in relation to what they earn ? Maybe smashing bankers in the face with a brick is OK ? Negative media attention / over zealous attention from 'haters' is a very obvious downside to being a banker , so maybe they should take the large sums have cash they have and go some place quiet and stop moaning ?

Legal or otherwise it's still a consequence of having that type of life - I shouldn't have mentioned the money it seems to be a major red herring - everyone has good/bad sides of their life based on the choices they've made and the job they do - so people seem to think because someone is a famous actor or singer or whathaveyou they're some kind of living deity and we should treat like as such - but they're just the same organic material as the rest of us, only they have very polarized jobs - huge rewards in terms of adulation and yes money, but it comes at the price of privacy.

As for Bankers... as a former RBS relationship manager (although about as far removed from the sort of thing everyone seems to hate us for as it's possible to be) let me tell you - of the 15 people I know closely who lost their job in 2009, almost none remain in the industry, most of us are indeed getting paid a lot less and doing 'nicer' jobs - a surprising amount have gone into teaching.

[Tiggsy]

JLaw would be in hot water as a teacher....she's tits out on the web!

[ChemicalChaos]

boxst said:

Having looked at 4chan and reddit the age of the average poster seems to be (at best) early twenties. So they grew up with the Harry Potter girl as someone around the same age or older and they perhaps liked. So it isn't that weird.

Now, if you are 40 ......

This. EW is 2 years older than me, and I grew up watching her. Therefore I'm allowed to say that I've always found her stunningly attractive (though she is a bit stick-thin for my tastes these days).

The same principle applies to her HP co-star Georgina Leonidas, who I grew up watching on various BBC shows

[Jasandjules]

Surely for half of them this is a major plus to their careers?

[Atmospheric]

Jasandjules said:

Surely for half of them this is a major plus to their careers?

Of course it is - infact it's a bigger boost that they could possibly imagine. all the interviews surrounding, the copyrights the Twitter attention. They are making $$$$ from this.

Of course they would be embarrassed, who wouldn't, but I guarantee there is at least one who LOVED the attention. It's human nature...and they are human.

Of course publicly outrgaed etc...

[grumbledoak]

Jasandjules said:

Surely for half of them this is a major plus to their careers?

I thought it was clever viral advertising for "Sex Tape"?

[Lost soul]

grumbledoak said:

I thought it was clever viral advertising for "Sex Tape"?

I would not be surprised if it turned out it was

[anonymous-user]

P-Jay said:

Mr_B said:

P-Jay said:

Negative media attention / over zealous attention from 'fans' is a very obvious downside to being an actor / singer / celebrity however you want to call it - it EXACTLY like a solder being hurt, although despite the others bleat about it, it's not nearly as bad - it's an unintended consequence of someone's job / lifestyle.

I refer to the money side at the risk of stating the obvious not many people who have been affected by this, if any, need to carry on being a celebrity to feed themselves etc, if fame is suddenly so terrible, they can stop being famous relatively quickly by simply turning off the PR machine.

I'm no more jealous than anyone else if they're honest, I just think that like everyone they should accept the rough with the smooth - they've reached the top of an industry that literally millions of people try to break into, they can demand huge amounts of money for their efforts, have thousands of people scream their names if they and go to places 99.99% of the global population can't - but if they're foolish enough to take naked pictures of themselves and put them on the internet, don't be surprised if they're found they'll be carried around the world by the exact same force of momentum that got them where they are today.

I'm still not sure why you think illegal acts are just tough luck and because of the money such people make it something lesser.
Who else gets the tough luck act for suffering illegal acts in relation to what they earn ? Maybe smashing bankers in the face with a brick is OK ? Negative media attention / over zealous attention from 'haters' is a very obvious downside to being a banker , so maybe they should take the large sums have cash they have and go some place quiet and stop moaning ?

Legal or otherwise it's still a consequence of having that type of life - I shouldn't have mentioned the money it seems to be a major red herring - everyone has good/bad sides of their life based on the choices they've made and the job they do - so people seem to think because someone is a famous actor or singer or whathaveyou they're some kind of living deity and we should treat like as such - but they're just the same organic material as the rest of us, only they have very polarized jobs - huge rewards in terms of adulation and yes money, but it comes at the price of privacy.

As for Bankers... as a former RBS relationship manager (although about as far removed from the sort of thing everyone seems to hate us for as it's possible to be) let me tell you - of the 15 people I know closely who lost their job in 2009, almost none remain in the industry, most of us are indeed getting paid a lot less and doing 'nicer' jobs - a surprising amount have gone into teaching.

So if you have a really nice car
You've worked hard for it
It's something other people desire
Then someone nicks it

Is it just a consequence of that lifestyle choice?

If someone was selling an openly stolen car on autotrader would you consider buying it?
Does the fact the keys were left in the open make any difference?

No-it's still a stolen car-regardless of if its an Audi or a Mclaren

Stolen photos like this are just as embarassing if you're a movie sar or a McDonalds worker.
They are still illegal-and still wrong.

Stop making excuses

[Atmospheric]

Your point is valid, but out of context. The same rules cannot apply. This will enhance their careers and popularity not hinder it snd ultimately - cash money.

Like I said this isn't a moral issue. P Jay made the points I don't need to make them again - this type of thing is now in this age a consquence of popularity. These people make millions and have extremely aspirational lives that people backstab, sell themselves and sell their souls for.

So while I have some sympathy on a human level. Its not moral whatsoever.

This type of thing has been going on since Pam and Tommy Lee, so nothing new.

If you notice there are many that haven't been. Maybe they are just smarter? Or better advised? Who knows.

[THX]

ChemicalChaos said:

boxst said:

Having looked at 4chan and reddit the age of the average poster seems to be (at best) early twenties. So they grew up with the Harry Potter girl as someone around the same age or older and they perhaps liked. So it isn't that weird.

Now, if you are 40 ......

This. EW is 2 years older than me, and I grew up watching her. Therefore I'm allowed to say that I've always found her stunningly attractive (though she is a bit stick-thin for my tastes these days).

The same principle applies to her HP co-star Georgina Leonidas, who I grew up watching on various BBC shows

Cant argue with that.

I'm 31.

[IanMorewood]

I was on holiday when this storm in a tea cup blew up, is there anywhere that the photos are hosted still so that I can assess the invasion of privacy that may or may not have happened?

[Atmospheric]

I think a picture search in popular adult sites would find what you desire.

[ChemicalChaos]

Dont look for the ones of the American gymnast though, she later tweeted to state she was under 18 when they were taken.

No, I havent seen them.

[anonymous-user]

Atmospheric said:

Your point is valid, but out of context. The same rules cannot apply. This will enhance their careers and popularity not hinder it snd ultimately - cash money.

If said car was insured and you got equal/more than the value of the car out of the insurance-would it make the fact it was stolen-you p&j was taken any less demoralising/hurtful?

It IS a moral issue-the fact that people are willing to look at photos stolen-regardless of who they are stolen from! Just dismissing it as part of the age is not acceptable.

[BrassMan]

cookie118 said:

Stolen photos like this are just as embarrassing if you're a movie star or a McDonalds worker.
They are still illegal-and still wrong.

Stop making excuses

Pirated. Society seems to be drawing a distinction these days.
Also, I'm told that it's only a criminal matter if the cracker sells the images, otherwise it's a civil matter.

I've got to wonder about the agents are. You'd think that an asset as valuable as J Law would be worth handling or coaching in more advanced privacy precautions.

[Atmospheric]

cookie118 said:

Atmospheric said:

Your point is valid, but out of context. The same rules cannot apply. This will enhance their careers and popularity not hinder it snd ultimately - cash money.

If said car was insured and you got equal/more than the value of the car out of the insurance-would it make the fact it was stolen-you p&j was taken any less demoralising/hurtful?

It IS a moral issue-the fact that people are willing to look at photos stolen-regardless of who they are stolen from! Just dismissing it as part of the age is not acceptable.

Alot of things aren't acceptable. One could argue making sure their privacy is kept private isn't acceptable. This is the world and it has its rough with the smooth. If, for instance particular celebrity photos, videos or files showed them to have questionable tendencies, which you were against, would it be morally wrong then? Or would it be a "Good job it was exposed?"

People, at the end of the day are have moral crusades for things which suit them. In this instance, it doesn't affect you or I, but they will be making millions in campaigns, interviews and coverage. Their stock has gone up and is going up as we speak - its called PR and celebrities thrive off of it. Some of these people may have gone topless and naked for movies and photoshoots anyway. This is a wakeup to everyone to think twice about their personal data.

[GTiRichTea]

Thought this was quite interesting seems that the emma watson stuff was a hoax to attack 4chan.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/24/6837585/emma-wat...

[Pommygranite]

GTiRichTea said:

Thought this was quite interesting seems that the emma watson stuff was a hoax to attack 4chan.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/24/6837585/emma-wat...

Its silly. Trying to close down 4Chan is like being in a boat out at sea and shouting at the fish to stop swimming.

[FunkyNige]

GTiRichTea said:

Thought this was quite interesting seems that the emma watson stuff was a hoax to attack 4chan.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/24/6837585/emma-wat...

If a company has set the Emma Watson stuff up as a hoax just as PR stunt then I think that's bang out of order. If she has taken any private photos on an iphone then she must've been dreading the countdown thing to see just what exactly was going to be released then only to find out a company just wanted some publicity. I know publicity is a big thing in the media industry but not at the expense of causing major stress to one person and implying a group would do something like just to get at someone.
That's assuming she has taken any, if she hasn't then she must've just rolled her eyes and got on with life.

[Mr Will]

Pommygranite said:

GTiRichTea said:

Thought this was quite interesting seems that the emma watson stuff was a hoax to attack 4chan.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/24/6837585/emma-wat...

Its silly. Trying to close down 4Chan is like being in a boat out at sea and shouting at the fish to stop swimming.

Not quite. 4Chan is just a website, its the users who cause the trouble. Trying to shut down 4chan because somebody used it to leak photographs is like trying to shut down twitter because somebody used it to make a bomb threat. A better analogy would be closing down a pub because undesirables meet there - they are just going to move on to the next boozer down the road and carry on with business as usual. If you are going to tackle the problem, you need to tackle the problem - not tackle the location where it occurred.