Meh, if even JD Salinger had one (really, his literary agent doubling up), it’s not going to trip any of my alarm bells if anybody else has one.
I hear what you are saying and it has merit. But I can also see that they accepted the fact that there would be photographers at the event and probably right outside. But, as they were leaving, I am not sure I can blame them for getting rattled if a mob started following them down the street by all means including cars, bikes, and scooters, only to catch up to them at the next red light. I can also see them telling their driver not to go directly to where they were staying and instead try to run and shake them off, but like a swarm of bees it’s just not always possible, especially in NYC, and it went on for too long before they sought refuge at a police station. The plan to try and take a yellow cab was probably also unwise. It’s easy for us to criticize their decisions in the heat of the moment.
I am no fan of either of these two attention hogs, and it’s a debate for another thread if they are actively seeking attention, but I am not going to criticize them any more for what occurred here. And yes, they need to have a talk with their spokesperson - which is who I blame for making this news story pop and trip everyone’s bullshit meter (mine included).
Is there no one else who sees this entire problem as being directly caused by their decision to stay in a friend’s apartment that they wanted to keep secret? Staying in a hotel eliminates the entire problem.
I know what you are saying, and while it might seem reasonable for you or me, I don’t buy it for these folk. Do you think this is the first time they encountered aggressive paps? Did they forget the circumstances surrounding his mother’s death? When hiring security/drivers, did they not seek someone who would likely have experience with such potential situations? And, do they feel so insecure with the security they hired, that they feel they ought to tell them how to conduct their business in the heat of the moment?
They are hardly the first celebrities to hit Manhattan.
Why does it have to be all or none? Is it not fair for them to not mind this kind of thing while at an event, but dislike it while driving home?
To me, that’s like when your introverted friend, turns down your invitation to grab a drink with “No thanks, I’m just going to stay home tonight” and you reply “fine, but since you feel that way, I don’t expect to ever see you at a bar again”.
Why don’t celebrities get to have time to themselves? Why is it that just because they’re famous they’re almost required to allow this kind of thing to happen all the time.
Upthread there was some discussion about a neighbor ‘following’ you home because you both happen to be driving the same way. But what if that neighbor didn’t ‘happen’ to be driving the same way. What if they followed you everywhere you went. Go to the mall and they’re right behind you. They wait in the parking lot while you shop, they follow you back home again and spend all day watching your house waiting for you to leave again so they can keep following you.
Even if that’s all they were doing, that’s going to get really old, really fast. What if they were taking pictures with their cell phone the whole time. What if, when you tried to shake them in rush hour traffic, they would use the breakdown lane to catch up.
Does it matter if you’re just someone that works a normal 9-5 job or a huge celebrity? Anyone is going to get sick of that after a while.
What difference could any of these questions make to the events that happened a few days ago? It sounds to me like you’re Just Asking Questions with a strong implication that, since they’ve dealt with this before, it’s somehow their fault or their responsibility.
And then had the paps sitting outside that location for the duration of the stay, with telephoto lens, intruding on the privacy of their hosts and anyone in the nearby vicinity.
uote=“Dinsdale, post:84, topic:984184”]
When hiring security/drivers, did they not seek someone who would likely have experience with such potential situations?
[/quote]
Sure, but what can private drivers do, when being followed? Serious question.
They’re not cops, they can’t direct traffic away from H&M.
Harry knows that telling their driver to go fast to get away is not an option, given what happened to his mother when they tried that option.
What does hiring experienced security drivers accomplish?
Have any other recommendations of how they should change their lifestyle to accommodate the paparazzi?
I know one star decided to wear the same clothes every single time he ventured outside specifically to prevent paparazzi pictures from having value. Maybe they could do that, or move to Idaho and give up anything resembling friendships, charitable work or business opportunities.
Since we’re telling them how to live.
Is that what you’re doing? Me, I’m trying to suggest easy ways for them to get around town without being noticed as much.
Also the way most of us get about when we’re visiting, especially those of us who can afford a hotel room, which I believe the royals can spring for. This eliminates at least half of the problem, paps following them to the apartment so they can camp out. Hotels have pretty good security to make sure no one can get up to the 17th floor–paps have to wait on the street, which on 5th avenue can get quite boring.
Ya know - if I knew that, maybe I’d be a professional security driver. 
Since I can spitball as well as the rest of you, the security firm could advise against where they were staying. Or they could inform them of the likelihood that paps could follow. Or they could coordinate with the police.
Yeah, the paps were the primary reason this situation escalated (if it really DID escalate. All we really know is H/M drove around for a while. Didn’t the paps ultimately follow them to their residence? So what was accomplished?). But H/M and their agents didn’t seem to respond to the situation well.
And no, Joey, I’m not Just Asking Questions. I’m observing that these folk ought to have had experience and means to avoid/minimize this situation. That they did not is clearly on them. Of course they bear some portion of the blame.
It can create other problems, though, like hotel staff wanting to score a quick payday selling pics, quotes, or - God help us all - items to the paps.
If you’re staying with friends in a private place, and both you and the friends want it to stay private, you can have a chance to let your hair down a little and not be on your guard when you’re there. When you’re in a hotel, and a celebrity, I’m not sure that’s true.
That’s why I suggest a classy hotel (the Pierre or Essex House) that are accustomed to hosting celebrities and are pretty safeguarded against pap invasions of their guests’ privacy. Seems kinda rude to your friends to subject them to this behavior while you’re staying with them, and certainly inconvenient to you if you want to maintain your privacy. You go into a hotel, arrange with the management your security concerns, and you’re pretty well protected. If you go to a gala, you’re inviting the paparazzi to shoot pics as you get there and back, but once you’re inside your hotel, you’ve got some semblence of privacy back.
Or the Carlyle Hotel. A favorite of Diana’s.
Why the secrecy surrounding the identity of their host? Could be anybody with or without a recognizable name. Their consternation at being followed could be embarrassment at heading home to a just another Airbnb. Lol.
I know that’s what you’re trying to do. You’re not wrong. The thing is… the paparazzi aren’t an immutable function of the universe. They aren’t a hurricane you need to fly around because… well flying through a hurricane is dumb.
They are human beings. Assholes. Assholes who make their living selling bullshit pictures to other assholes, who sell their newspapers to other assholes, who get off on being shitty towards certain unfavored people or who don’t care if their beloved people can’t walk down the street in peace.
It’s an entirely manufactured crisis, not by Harry and Meghan, by the paparazzi, and I think it’s uncool for society to blame the targets of this harassment for not doing enough to avoid them.
They’re kinda both.
I mean, you’d be upset if some celeb were able to walk around in public with his current lover holding hands but could say to anyone with a camera “No photos” and they would have to comply legally.
Well, you might not be but there are a lot of folks who’d see this as privileged behavior and not suitable for a free society. If you see a celeb on a public street and have a camera handy, you might want to take a snapsnot, right?
Paps just take this right to an extreme, and it’s hard to see how you could prohibit photos of celebs in public entirely without restricting freedoms we all value.
To an extent, it’s just the price celebs accept as a fair exchange for their fame.
No, because a hurricane doesn’t have freedom of choice to not be a dick and knock down people’s houses. Paparazzi have choice, and are choosing to be assholes.
I’m not saying to change the law, I’m saying blame the people who deserve the blame.
Seems kind of pointless to me.
Lots of folks I don’t approve of–litterbugs, elderly clueless drivers, leafblowers, phone scammers, manspreaders, whiny Karens, unskilled musicians, homeschooled idiots, the list goes on and on. But if all I can do is complain about them, and blame them, they’re going to continue doing what they do, and nothing can stop or curtail or contain them.
Harry and Meghan are unwilling to live their lives behind walls, and the public is willing to pay for photos that they resent when they step out from behind those walls. I can’t envision much of a satisfactory solution for them: they’re public figures and people are allowed to photograph them in public.
It seems to me that it would be a small matter to have a contingent of police layering on tickets to the offending paparazzi. That is, you’ve got the escort team and the ticket team. In most places, get enough tickets, lose license. In addition, the time it takes to be ticketed would allow the target to escape. Seems like a good deterrence to me, but maybe I’m not smart enough to be a cop.
It reminds me of musicians who say “It’s about the music, man. I hate all this fame, and the fans, and the press!”
You do know you could play music at home, right? Or is it about the millions of dollars which go hand in hand with the fame, the fans, and the press?
And no, Joey, I’m not Just Asking Questions.
Dinsdale, here’s the first line of RationalWiki’s Just Asking Questions page:
Just asking questions (also known as JAQing off) is a way of attempting to make wild accusations acceptable (and hopefully not legally actionable) by framing them as questions rather than statements.
How is that not exactly what you were doing?
You asked:
-Do you think this is the first time they encountered aggressive paps?
-Did they forget the circumstances surrounding his mother’s death?
-When hiring security/drivers, did they not seek someone who would likely have experience with such potential situations?
-And, do they feel so insecure with the security they hired, that they feel they ought to tell them how to conduct their business in the heat of the moment?
You were literally asking questions to avoid making an accusation. You said so right here " I’m observing that these folk ought to have had experience and means to avoid/minimize this situation. That they did not is clearly on them. Of course they bear some portion of the blame."
Given Harry’s seemingly principled legal battles with the tabloid press (with the bonus of giving an ex-royal some purpose) it seems likely that H&M made a meal of the standard paparazzi dickishness, rather than calmly going to their location. Convoluted car-swapping evasive manoeuvres would attract more paparazzi, after all.
But it also makes sense for H&M to highlight the deplorable media circus.