Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Celebrities are annoying but, more than that, celebrity culture is damaging, especially to young people.


Didn't "Role Model" used to mean someone you could look up to? It's important for young people to have role models and celebrity culture is about telling the lie that, somehow celebrity is better than "non-celebrity". "Four legs good, two legs bad". The real truth is that our own lives are what we choose to make them and celebrity is just airbrushing and PR spin (smoke and mirrors).


I'm going to pop down off my high-horse for a moment, just long enough to make a itsy bitsy confession. I would never dream of spending cash on OK, Heat, Whatever Magazine BUT ... when I'm at the hairdressers..... well, it all seems like game-on. I like to have a little look at the bitchy articles, the ones that show celebs having bad hair days. So there you are, I confess. It's a secret pleasure. I wonder why?

There's only so long you can spend in a pub discussing the on-set problems during the shoot of Apocalypse Now / which Martin Amis novel is the worst / the small print in the FT.


If Bono's hair provides a lighthearted means into a spot of lighthearted and frivolous banter about nothing in particular with a few laughs thrown in, just to pass the time, then I'm all for it.


Slebrity in nothing new, and half the new ones are no better or worse than half the old ones from the last few millenia: Gladiators (famous for killing people), Good-looking people (natural ability to be good-looking), Murderers (killing people), Saints (being fictitious. getting killed), Soldiers (killing people), Footballers (natural ability to kick ball), Royalty (being born into royalty / killing people).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Had a Red Admiral in front driveway today. Hadn't seen one for some time
    • It’s a flat fee levy payable by guests staying in hotel and hostel rooms, so added to the bill.  This already happens in Manchester and Liverpool ( I think in Liverpool it’s a percentage, so the more expensive rooms pay more). I read somewhere that Edinburgh is doing this next year? Charges of this kind are becoming common around the world. I think it absolutely makes sense for Southwark and other boroughs are bound to follow.
    • In  parts of Europe you just get charged tax at the end of your stay somewhere. Usually a couple of quid added to your bill. Most tourists are pretty happy to stump up the cost, as it's an expected expense.  I  think it's a good way to make money and remove the burden from locals.  It's for foreigners, Sue - I'm sure Londoners and brits will still be able to freely cross the borough lines without having to go through checkpoint charlie 🙂 
    • It doesn't work like that. There won't be differential pricing for tourists and residents at any attractions, no checkpoints nor a requirement to carry one's papers with one at all times. A levy is put on hotels, maybe on Air B&Bs, on a bed per night basis. That cash goes to Southwark. It's pretty easy to administer.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...