Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/09/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Paparazzi &Princess Di
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 13:58:01 -0400 (EDT)

In einer eMail vom 01.09.1997  17:16:16, schreiben Sie:

>At 01:53 AM 9/1/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>7) You can bet a fortune, that almost every newspaper/ tv station will show
>>the funeral pix, specially the royal (children's) tears.
>Don't even pretend that this is a legitimate criticism of the press.

Nope, not at all. And if you would have cited my previous arguments it would
have been quite evident. You don't drive on 160 to 180 km/ h through an inner
city. Paparazzi just do their job - some persons don't like it, but a lot of
persons are excited by their pix - and pay to see them. 

Besides, Paparazzi are no threat to life, not in general, not on motorcicles,
and specially not such a threat for taking the risk into account to crash
into passengers on 160 to 180 km/h (sorry for that sentence - my German is
better !).

And, if it's allowed to ask, who protects people on severely drunken Princess
drivers (1.75 prom.)  ? 

To make the point clear: I like picture napping, although I need to admit,
that I don't want to be a victim either. But I still like it, and to me e.g.
Weegee was a great photographer. OTOH, I despise those news twisters, who
start with "Paparazzi terror killed ..." and continue with all the bloody
muddy details, including paparazzi pix beginning in 1993.