Celebrity endorsements: Assessing the trend of celebrities doing commercials – Part 1

If one were to think about it, advertisement and celebrities perform the same purpose in our culture, they represent a source of fantasy for us. It therefore makes absolute sense that the two would combine efforts to attempt to sell the masses a product by selling an appearance of happiness and contentment. After all, advertisement and Hollywood is all about marketing the allusion of the product or a person, not the reality of it.

In the end, it is this image that is of utmost importance in selling products in a consumer culture. Images of happy women with bouncy and full heads hair or joyous kids who got the toy or snack that they wanted is the backbone of marketing imagery. Celebrities provide a shortcut to achieve this effect, the thought that a certain product has the capacity to satiate one’s appetite and thus lead to contentment and happiness. Celebrities are often presented as the image of perfection in our culture. Of course, little mention is made of the army of stylists and hair dressers who help make this happen just as little mention is made of the fact that the right toothpaste will not necessarily bring bliss.

Still, nothing is new about this. Even as early as the beginning of television, famous hosts and television personalities would endorse the products that were advertised on the program. Even now the phenomenon has gone international. What’s more noteworthy about the contemporary use of celebrities in marketing is the number who do ads in foreign countries so as not to harm their cred in the US.

Still, advertisement and celebrity culture feed off one another. For marketers, a well placed celebrity appearance can speak volumes. For celebrities, advertising gigs can keep them in the public eye giving the attention so many of them crave.

Do celebrities have a positive or negative effect on society? – Part 5

I admit, I have fallen into the celebrity – watch trap. We follow their every move, admiring their physical appearance and style. We are in awe of the glitzy lifestyle and binge out on every available piece of information regarding the who’s who of la-la land. ..and yes, some of us are fans of some actual talent that may be possessed by them. We may call them idols, stars, icons or celebrities, but do we ever pause to consider the effects they have on society and how detrimental they may be?

First, consider the effects on a particular individual. Recently I encountered a chance meeting with a celebrity. On retrospect, I find it quite embarrassing that a thirtysomething mother of two was reduced to a tongue tied, blushing, giggling – dare I say fan’. However, on getting over the high’ of meeting a celebrity I felt nothing but pity for him and shame for myself. He was, after all just another person trying to enjoy a day out with a friend or member of his family and I, being the first one to yell out his name, running towards him in a crowded restaurant was the leader of a mob! My four year old was quite bewildered by the experience as mummy transformed into the hungry wolf’! No, I did not enjoy the effects of his celebrity status once I realised what I had become!

Celebrities, whether they choose to or not are role models for our youth. Unfortunately many celebrities do not understand their responsibility in society as such. Thus the desire of every sixteen year old girl is to acquire the size zero figure which leads to the ever increasing rate of teenage anorexia and bulimia. Also, celebrities seem to have this blas attitude towards cigarettes, alcohol, drugs and foul language which lead kids to think that these are cool because the celebrities using them are cool.

Yes, some celebrities have real talents which should be recognised. Also to be fair not all celebrities are poor role models. Of course, we applaud celebrities for using their status as a powerful tool for raising awareness about serious issues such as aids. And who could fault any one for using their status to raise funds for charities worldwide. However history teaches us that too much power corrupts. It may be society that has created this Frankensteinish power in the first place but we need to know when to say enough is enough! We as a society have put these idols on their pedestals and we need to take them down!

Do celebrities have a positive or negative effect on society? – Part 9

Like most things in life, even the glamorized world of celebrity shares a duality within the universe. There are celebrities who invest their time & efforts in helping worthy causes & who serve as role models for those who have none. There are also celebrities who abuse their own reputation by making careless decisions. One might argue that celebrities are adults who are responsible for their own actions & since they are aware that the public eye always has them in its sight they need to practice more caution than the everyday Joe.

I agree with this to an extent. It is difficult to unequivocally place all the blame on the celebrities themselves when the excessive media coverage walks hand in hand with the news it delivers. One might conclude that what ANYONE does in their own private time couldn’t possibly affect the immense scope of society unless someone else takes the initiative to broadcast their actions to a larger audience.

The paparazzi survives on the public’s desire for juicy gossip. Individuals that CHOOSE to indulge in tabloid magazines & television shows are not victims. I will give a majority of society the benefit of the doubt in assuming that your average adult is not going to let the fact that a young socialite exposed themselves in a night club EFFECT them one way or another. We are responsible for our own bodies & our own actions, & anyone who lives their day to day lives around a celebrity has just as much ability not to. To say that celebrities have that much influence makes society (not the celebrities alone) out to be shallow, gullible, & obsessive.

Unfortunately, the celebrities actions deemed negative by society are things that many average citizens also experience. Hollywood divorce is a daily occurrence, but why do we seem to criticize celebrities for it more than our multiple neighbors & family members who’ve split as well? Painful life experiences like that make me feel more sorry for the the celebrity who is having that private business exploited.

Everyone has but one life. If someone loves nothing more than working in the movie business they should have every right to do so. I find it somewhat tragic & sad that because they are following their chosen path they are often simultaneously expected to be super-human. We all make mistakes. No one is perfect or has it all together. No one should have to answer to anyone but themselves for things that are really nobody else’s business.

Celebrity gossip: Paris Hilton & Britney Spears – Part 1

now, we have something to talk about the two most talked about peoples in the world.now these to ladies seem they can’t stay out the news head lines,i don’t no if Britney is having alto of stress on her or she just don’t care about who she real is anymore,and Paris she likes to party and nothing and no one will stop her from doing just that.i believe that is a way of life for both of them womens.Britney was not ready for any kids yet ,she jumped into that way to fast,now these are the results of it all.well these ladies believe that they will not get in trouble because they are celebrity’s,that don’t mean jack,those the ones that think it’s OK to do wrong and get away with it,and sometimes the law is not fair ,and reason i say that is that Paris get out in 3days ,and Lil,Kim has to do her whole year,but also look at there crimes,Kim lied and Paris got drunk same Thanh .all i have to say is give it a break,celebrity’s that go to jail.these women have to really take a good look at them self’s ,and Britney has kids to think about now she has to put all that other stuff behind her and start looking ahead so that her children will look up to they’re mom and say thanks mom you did a great job raisin me on you’re on.dad might been there but not like you mom.it’s really sad.god bless that family’s

Do celebrities have a positive or negative effect on society? – Part 2

I believe that celebrities have a negative effect on society because they think that in no way they have to follow the rules of normal society. That we civilized people dont have the right to judge because thay are celebrities, but if we wouldn’t advertise it maybe they wouldn’t be so bad. Whats wrong with these celebs, us. We promote thier wrong doings as “oh look now this person got pulled over drunk driving” yet they are seen driving again. See kids tend to go with the trend of the teenage celebrities. We all know that as role models they are no good yet people promote thier wrong doings everywhere which give our kids the idea to think, “hey that famous person did it and got away with it so can I”. As sociey we should not promote it. Our kids watch and learn enough from television and movies that we have every news anchor taliking about what the next person did. Even if they are famous things like that should”nt be blurted out to the public as much as they do. When us regular working people have a downfall we don’t advertise it because eventually we pick ourselves up and go on with our lives and our kids never know about it. Why parade celebrities baggage all that gives is more motive to our kids to do as they do.

I mean the celebrities these days are very out of hand partying doing drugs and that is the fault of thier parents if they had a little more parental guidence like our children do they might have just a little more common sense and not do what they do. See what they do is act out they want attention from society because they don’t get enough attention from home. So that makes them bad for that. So yes they are bad role models but only because we put them out there, so it makes them look like they are. We can say that they are bad role models because as celebrities they should know better that they shouldn’t act out because we say so. I mean come on you know better than to drive drunk but they do it anyways because its cool to thier friends. Our kids do it to and we would hate for anybody to judge them and advertise all on national television. I do think they are a negative affect on society if society lets them affect us. We have more standard we work hard for everything that we have they get it easy everythoing is handed to them and for that they think its ok to get drunk to party to.

So in conclusion, we all have our ups our downs and we would have the same effect to society if it was advertised on every news paper every news channel and every magazines. We just have to look at it read about it and say wow they screwed up really bad. Say ” should i do that to”?, No. and not let that negativity coming from celebrities be a negative effect on us.

The etiquette that should be employed when meeting celebrities – Part 1

If you happen to live in the New York City or Los Angeles, meeting celebrities in public may be an everyday happening, but for the rest of us, the chance encounter with one of our favorite stars or other public figure can leave quite an impressionwhether it is positive or negative.

Being a celebrity or other public figure is indeed a different world. It is a vertical community where only the truly, hugely famous are afforded a royalty status of sorts; as the saying goes, the famous are different from the rest of the people around us.

It is also an area where the average person eventually takes leave of usual, acceptable social graces; I have seen and experienced these types of not so stellar behavior personally over the years both as a fan and in my own work. Fame mongers and fans that tend to take things a “little too far” (to state it politely) are permanently on the rampage, so any mere civilian is advised to brace themselves for nothing less welcoming than a glacial reception at best.

In chance sightings, it’s polite to ignore these high-profile people. They’re not public property and may have bodyguards around them. But if you happen to be walking down the street, in a store, or some other place and you see your favorite celebrity and cant resist ignoring him/her, feel free to smile and say “hello,” but do not stop them.

If they pause to acknowledge your greeting, it may be acceptable to stop and say something simple and genuine; such as how much you enjoyed their recent performance and how they added such depth to a role, for example. Avoid gushing comments such as, “Oh my, you are totally hot in person!” They’ve most likely heard that line millions of times, not to mention it’s just plain classless.

On introduction, chat needs to be pacey. Remember that there’s no such thing as an original line; they’ve heard it all before. Feigning total ignorance such as, “Sorry, you look familiar, but I can’t place where I have seen you before,” may be pushing it a bit. The wildly unfamiliar concept of anonymity may delight them, but you are in danger of incensing them at the same time.

Disassociate them from any signature character and don’t beg for them to perform their famous catchphrases or break out in one of their popular song hits. Avoid looking the fool and never ever remind them of any previous meetings; they see thousands of people in a year’s time and won’t remember you.

The first instinct may be to ask that person for his or her

Fiction vs. reality TV – Part 2

Television is a regular part of our everyday lives and we are just going to have to accept that. What is important, then, is to make sure that the television that plays in each of our houses consist of programs that are educational, instructive, age appropriate and, essentially, quality viewing. All television shows fall under one of two categories: Fiction or Non-Fiction / Reality. There are pros and cons to each but which one is better?

When debates about television rage their strongest, it is typically when discussing what our children are watching. Obviously, in families with children the programs should be monitored for language, sexual content and violence regardless of whether the program is Fiction or Reality.

In an interesting study conducted by the Parents Television Council, the top twenty shows watched by children between the ages of 2-17 were ranked by the council. Television shows either got the green light’ for suitable, the yellow light’ for questionably suitable, or the red light’ for unsuitable. The full report can be found at http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/p ublications/reports/top10besta ndworst/2007/WAYCW2007.pdf. Only 8 of 20 got the green light, and each and every one were Reality shows such as Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, Are you Smarter than a 5th Grader and Supernanny. Of the next 6 shows, falling into the “Questionably Suitable” category, again we find Reality programming; America’s Funniest Home Videos and the Amazing Race, for example. The one exception in this category is a single cartoon: The Simpsons. Finally, shows that received the “Unsuitable” red light were all Fiction. Included in this category are two cartoons that require mentioning: Family Guy and American Dad. Cartoons are particularly dangerous because we automatically associate them with children’s television. In this case, we couldn’t be more wrong. Thankfully, the top 8 most popular shows were under either the green or yellow light categories. #9 most popular was Family Guy. For you reference, this show has an episode that features a baby, Stewie, brutally attacking the family dog, Brian, for not repaying his $20 dollars on time. There is frequent sex and sexual innuendos, foul language, obesity, and discrimination. It is all in the name of satire and, for open-minded adults, may be enlightening; regardless, it is in no way a children’s program.

According to this study, Reality television for family viewing certainly wins the battle. However, it must be noted that this only included the 20 most popular shows. It is still important to monitor your children’s viewing because there are some Reality programs that, in my opinion, shouldn’t be aired on regular cable; you should have to pay to view them just as you have to pay to view Play Boy. On the other hand, there are some fabulous Fiction family programs. Seventh Heaven, Degrassi High, and Gilmore Girls are all fictional, but encourage the values we would all love to instill in our children.

When I was a child most television programming was Fiction, and most of those were suitable for all viewers; at least anything that played before 10:00 pm. I remember the one show my mother wouldn’t allow me to watch was The Simpsons, which now gets the green light. Society is changing, and each parent needs to determine what is suitable for their children. Regardless, as Reality television continues to monopolize the Prime Time viewing schedule, it seems that it the answer will be Reality over Fiction, 14 times out of 20.

Are celebrity adoptions helping or hurting international adoption relations?

Celebrity adoptions cannot possibly be a guarantee to the child’s continued welfare. Adoption in general has its backwardness. First of all, it is a loving idea for anyone to want to share their home with a kid that is not theirs. However, it does not seal nor bind and it has no guarantees. The child can turn away, the one who adopted the child, might seize to be a regular celebrity and might become needy themselves.

Helping children generally in ‘children homes’ might be more suitable so that more kids can gain from the welfare and assistance given by others.

Celebrity adoptions might just be the start of more problems for example a celebrity actress who had previously made films might suddenly find that she cannot afford the lavish lifestyle that she used to have during the time she adopted. That would probably mean that she would be creating an International embarrassment when the kid or kids that she took up have to be returned.

A celebrity should concentrate on their own families and when they can, give to others. A celebrity should prepare for their own children’s future so that the celebrity kids can grow up to give from their surplus to others and not try to take up a burden that is not theirs.

It is hard enough to take care of one’s own kids!

Taking up the kids of another leads to resentment, blackmailing, jealousy and discontentment so that sometimes the kids adopted end up resenting. The kids that have been raised in proper adoption homes tend to fair better in later life because they have been able to accept the reality and facts in life and of life and would be able to face the world realistically.

A child adopted by a Celebrity is being given a world that is unreal, thinking that it might last out but sometimes, never does. The adopted child can never really accept parents that are not his or hers. It is a fantasy to believe that when lots of money and power is showered on the child of another, they would come to love you especially when you need them the most.

The possibility is realistically nil.

A child left in the adopted home is more likely to be able to accept the fact that his or her parents left them in the care of a home for whatever reasons that they did. This child wants his or her parents to want them and the last thing they would need, is a celebrity robbing it unwittingly on them that no one ‘but them’ can love them. This should create even more strain and possibly quiet hate and great resentment.

It is unnatural and the best a celebrity can do, is give adopted kids as a ‘multitude’, plenty of gifts and comfort and they [celebrity] would find that it is best to give in unlimited ways than in restrictive ways.

It is best to avoid unwanted attention thus using it where the need is much greater by building schools for them, building welfare communities for them, providing medicine, water and food for them. They don’t quite need a specific name to be tied to, all they need is a survival kit and then, should be able to make their own names themselves from the schools and education that people in general provide for them [adopted kids].

Why celebrity adoptions are getting so much media attention – Part 1

Today’s trend of big name celebrities adopting children is a double blessing for the media. Any newspaper publisher will tell you that stories about baby rescues and heroic celebrities sell papers. Headlines uniting the two sell even more papers.

High power celebrities like Angelina Jolie and Madonna are already great fodder for a media story. But throw a child, especially an underprivileged third world child into the mix, and you’ve got media gold.

The media knows that any mention of a celebrity getting her hands a little dirty in a third world country will attract readers. But tell them the celebrity’s heart was so touched that she couldn’t leave without taking a permanent memento with her, and readership increases. Or tell the readers that Angelina said she needed another child to balance out the colored faces around her breakfast table, and watch the papers sell.

The media knows the average reader is waiting for the real news about celebrity adoptions to appear, too. What kind of mother will busy Angelina be? Does Madonna really have the time to fit another child into her workout schedule? Have the ladies anticipated the problems with the media these adopted kids may face down the road? The media knows readers are eager for the answers to those questions.

In the meantime, the media will pander to their readers’ feeding frenzy and continue to report on the next celebrity adoption.

Lost’s Harold Perrineau Negotiating His Return to the Island

Harold Perrineau, former cast member on the series Lost, reveals that he is set to return on the Emmy and Golden Globe award-winning drama series.

Perrineau, a 43-year old actor, was best known for portraying Link in the Matrix movies. In addition, he was also popularly known for his character on the television series Oz where he played Augustus Hill. His other acting credits included On Line, Woman On Top, The Best Man, The Edge, Romeo + Juliet, I’ll fly Away and Smoke.

Most recently, he played the role of Michael Dawson in the first two seasons of the popular series Lost, but was written off in the entire season three.

However at the premier of the movie Meet the Robinsons, Perrineau disclosed to the public that he is presently in negotiations for his return to Lost in season four.

After his exclusion in Lost, he became preoccupied with the movie 28 Weeks Later, which is scheduled for release this year, and the CBS pilot entitled Demons. In fact, he announced that he is eager to do both Demons and Lost.

Although this appears to be quite difficult in terms of schedule configuration since Lost is generally shot in Hawaii while Demons is in Los Angeles.

With his return on Lost, another question comes into mind. How is Michael Dawson going to fit in the season four plot? So many things have already occurred and evolved since he left, it would be a quandary to know new nature of his character, having been responsible for the deaths of Ana Lucia, played by Michelle Rodriguez, and Libby, played by Cynthia Wartros.

As of the moment, there is still no word on other details of the negotiations, whether he’s coming back as a regular of just a cameo. Either way, it’s going to be intriguing to find out what’s in store for the much-awaited season four.

For more resources about Lost or especially about LOST’s Harold Perrineau Negotiating His Return to the Island please visit http://www.buddytv.com

Next Page »