Digital Spy Forums

Digital Spy Forums (http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/index.php)
-   Showbiz (http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=101)
-   -   The media & celebrity children (http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1807731)

lolly-licker 15-03-2013 16:40

The media & celebrity children
 
Hi guys,
Just a question out of genuine interest really.
Why are some celebrities' children's faces blanked out in the media and others not?
I thought it might be something to do with age, but then realised that Harper Beckham and Suri Cruise are always in the DM, but looking at the article about daniel Craig and Rachel Weisz today, her son's face was blanked out.
Is it a deal with the newspaper or what? :)

Hound of Love 15-03-2013 17:02

I think there must be some deal with the media with most "celebs" not to show their kids' faces until they're 18 or so.

(Although I was surprised when we saw Kate Moss's kid when Kate got married.)

lolly-licker 15-03-2013 17:27

Ahh right. Thank you :)

Betty Britain 15-03-2013 17:29

I personally think all papers should be banned from showing a child's face.. Their parent is famous.. Not them ..they should be allowed to be children

Julie_Evans 15-03-2013 17:55

I agree that famous people's children should be protected from the paparazzi, but if a celeb chooses to allow their kids to be snapped for magazine deals or have them star in reality shows, they can't really complain when their son or daughter gets a lense in their face.

lexi22 15-03-2013 18:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by lolly-licker (Post 64796001)
Ahh right. Thank you :)

Some specifically request that their kids' faces are always pixilated (privacy & security issues), which the media has to comply with or risk being sued. Some ask that their kids faces are pixilated when they're papped going about their day to day business but are ok with them being shown if it's at a public/media event like eg. a kids' film or show etc where pic taking by the media is an expected component.

Betty Britain 15-03-2013 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie_Evans (Post 64796569)
I agree that famous people's children should be protected from the paparazzi, but if a celeb chooses to allow their kids to be snapped for magazine deals or have them star in reality shows, they can't really complain when their son or daughter gets a lense in their face.

Totally agree.. I just think papers/mags shouldn't be allowed to have children on their pages..then those parents couldn't use their kids for publicity

Blondie X 15-03-2013 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betty Britain (Post 64796037)
I personally think all papers should be banned from showing a child's face.. Their parent is famous.. Not them ..they should be allowed to be children

I agree. It's not hard to get an order to ban photos of kids being taken. Jeff Brazier did it when jade died and we haven't seen the kids since, not even pixilated.

I don't think any of the public should have a clue what a celebritys child looks like until they're old enough to decide for themselves whether they want to be seen in the media

Betty Britain 15-03-2013 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blondie X (Post 64797051)
I agree. It's not hard to get an order to ban photos of kids being taken. Jeff Brazier did it when jade died and we haven't seen the kids since, not even pixilated.

I don't think any of the public should have a clue what a celebritys child looks like until they're old enough to decide for themselves whether they want to be seen in the media

Also those kids could then be spared some of the stories the media have done about them.. I.e. Suri Cruise.. The mail is obsessed with her.
Paul McCartney managed to keep his kids out the media and he is an internationally known star..so it's possible

Julie_Evans 15-03-2013 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betty Britain (Post 64797272)
Also those kids could then be spared some of the stories the media have done about them.. I.e. Suri Cruise.. The mail is obsessed with her.



Agree with this. Some of the reader's comments about the little girl really are vicious :o

Saltydog1955 15-03-2013 18:41

The Mail is obsessed with Sarah Jessica Parker's children. Not a week seems to go by but they're papped going to school, for a walk or shopping. And they way they comment on their clothes - 'mini fashionistas' etc verges on the creepy.

Betty Britain 15-03-2013 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955 (Post 64797318)
The Mail is obsessed with Sarah Jessica Parker's children. Not a week seems to go by but they're papped going to school, for a walk or shopping. And they way they comment on their clothes - 'mini fashionistas' etc verges on the creepy.

I agree with you.. They are also obsessed with what Harper Beckham wears.. I find it very strange how they dissect what these children wear and how much it cost..as their parents are wealthy I would expect their clothes to be from a higher quality shop than mine

wear thefoxhat 15-03-2013 19:08

I hate the way the Beckhams use their kids to promote 'brand Beckham', David and Victoria had normal childhoods out of the public eye, their kids can't even go to a swing park and play without beeing either gawped and pointed at or photographed , if I were famous I'd want to protect my kids from such intrusion. Can you imagine poor Romeo Beckham out on a first date at a local bowling alley or something with folk tweeting photos of him on their camera phones! If Johnny Depp's kids walked past you in the street you wouldn't even notice them, celebs can give their kids a normal childhood if they want to, the parents choose to be famous, it's wrong when they shove their kids into the media spotlight.

Julie_Evans 15-03-2013 19:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by wear thefoxhat (Post 64797933)
I hate the way the Beckhams use their kids to promote 'brand Beckham', David and Victoria had normal childhoods out of the public eye, their kids can't even go to a swing park and play without beeing either gawped and pointed at or photographed , if I were famous I'd want to protect my kids from such intrusion. Can you imagine poor Romeo Beckham out on a first date at a local bowling alley or something with folk tweeting photos of him on their camera phones! If Johnny Depp's kids walked past you in the street you wouldn't even notice them, celebs can give their kids a normal childhood if they want to, the parents choose to be famous, it's wrong when they shove their kids into the media spotlight.



All of this ^^

Blondie X 15-03-2013 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by wear thefoxhat (Post 64797933)
I hate the way the Beckhams use their kids to promote 'brand Beckham', David and Victoria had normal childhoods out of the public eye, their kids can't even go to a swing park and play without beeing either gawped and pointed at or photographed , if I were famous I'd want to protect my kids from such intrusion. Can you imagine poor Romeo Beckham out on a first date at a local bowling alley or something with folk tweeting photos of him on their camera phones! If Johnny Depp's kids walked past you in the street you wouldn't even notice them, celebs can give their kids a normal childhood if they want to, the parents choose to be famous, it's wrong when they shove their kids into the media spotlight.

I've mentioned on here before, my friend was in a taverna in Greece and someone told her Johnny Depp was in there. She looked and he was there with Vanessa, the kids and an older woman (who she was told was Vanessas mum). She said that, if you didn't know, you;d have thought they were just a normal family on holiday - only more beautiful! they were just going about their business with no entourage, no drama, no 'look at us'. because of that. No one troubled them.

missfrankiecat 15-03-2013 20:50

The truth is that where photos of children are published in this country it is with the consent and active cooperation of their parents. The childrens rights to privacy are such that any celeb who genuinely wants to prevent their children being the subject of press intrusion would always get a court order preventing publication.

Squealer_Mahony 15-03-2013 21:57

On the one hand I think the paps are scum for constantly photographing Suri Cruise and the like.
On the other, as has been said, the parents could keep them away from it all if they wanted.
It's not fair on the kids either way

Mr Dangerous 15-03-2013 22:24

What I don't understand is that in one newspaper A celeb child's face is blanked out but the same photo in another newspaper is left alone...


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:28.