Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Musician/Artist responsibility vs. Media responsibility

  • 01-06-2008 1:11pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭


    Hey folks,

    I've just been reading about and watching a few interviews with Pete Doherty (of Libertines & Babyshambles & heroin fame) and thought I'd get some opinions on this.

    I think it goes without saying that teenagers, kids, etc., will see a rockstar like Pete and, if they like him, try to replicate him to some degree. In NME for example, he was voted #1 Coolest and #2 Greatest Rockstar of all time (for some reason).

    In recent months he's been mainly in the papers for going in and out of rehab and prison, and various unpleasant acts (allegedly injecting heroin into an unconscious girl; squirting blood from a syringe at a camera).

    If the stories are true, then they're fairly deplorable, but what I'm wondering is, do the media have some responsibility for carrying these stories and perpetuating the image that is Pete Doherty the troubled rockstar? Constant comparisons made with Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, etc.?

    It's mainly tabloids of course, and they're not usually rich in moral fibre, but there is the inevitable judgemental tone to the stories. Should these papers not be lambasted as well, for carrying absolute non-stories about 'celebs' -- for the purpose of selling copies, and making money -- while at the same time contributing to the Cult of Doherty?

    It probably goes without saying that, because of the privileged position people like Pete Doherty, Amy Winehouse, etc., hold, they do have a certain amount of responsibility. But where does that end?

    If they want to do cocaine at a private party with friends, why shouldn't they? Surely in situations like that, the reporter with the hidden camera who puts it on the front page holds more of the responsibility.



    Cheers folks

    Dave


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭RATM


    I suppose thats just the beast that the media is. Like when they revealed Kate Moss was doing coke it was all "shock, horror, a model is doing coke, the shame of it all". It was a bit rich coming from tabloid reporters who know well that the modeling industry is riveted with cocaine.

    I don't hold that any of these celebrities have any responsibilities tho', they are free ppl who can live their lives as they choose. The spin the media then puts on the way they live their lives and the resulting fallout with kids is not their fault, you cant blame them for kids being impressionable.

    I wouldn't really think having packs of paparazzi hounding you day in and day out is a "privileged position", IMO it must be horrible. Of course it goes with their fame but who said they ever wanted to be famous and have all this crap thrown at them? Maybe their only ever ambition was to make good music that ppl liked and not have to deal with the grief they get in the papers on a daily basis.

    You could apportion some of the blame to the reporter but from his/her point of view either he reports it or someone else will. Having morals in tabloid journalism won't put the dinner on the table at the end of the day.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,978 ✭✭✭GhostInTheRuins


    It's an interesting question.

    I'm not sure how much responsibility artists should have for what their fans make of their personal lives. None maybe. I honestly believe that no teenager would think it's cool to be a junkie like Pete Doherty. If there is, it's likely due to their upbringing to be honest.

    If artists should feel responsibility that their personal lives could be a bad influence on people, just how far should that responsibility go? Should their music, lyrical content, album covers etc be created around the idea of being a good role model to teenagers that might buy their cd? It's more likely the music will will be a bigger influence than anything else, and afterall, they don't (necessarily) choose their fanbase.

    It is the tabloids fault. The 'celebrity' culture is a bane on todays society, and the sad fact is it's not going away any time soon. As long as people keep buying that crap there will always be 'stories' of 'artists' getting pissed, doing drugs, rehab, fighting etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭estebancambias


    Good question. I may answer it.........



    as soon as I get my God damn pizza!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement