It’s like PR: Say, for instance, a star wants to seem more family friendly – it’s arranged so that they’re photographed on a family day out, or eating an ice cream in the park (where have you heard the ice-cream line before?), and, it’s not that it’s fake; it could reflect reality, but that the pictures are just snippets, tiny parts of a picture that you won’t see the whole of.  Because, by necessity, we can’t all know each other. The specific problem is the degree to which people base their judgements on such superficial illustrations of complicated things. The news media shares blame for reporting things in such uncritical terms; by and large, unless the correspondents are total fuckwits, they know it’s a game.  They’re playing it too.  They know how complicated the world is really.

Based on how PR - through ice cream in the park, tough talk, waving at electronics, etc. - affects public image, the public must lap it up.

Are we really that retarded?  Isn’t it all a bit exploitable?  What would happen if people told the truth?  (It’s usually far more complicated than you think, you fucking dolts).  They’d fail.  Hard.  Yeah, I’m that fucking cynical.

And the worst thing?  You’d think celebrity news is inherently more dishonest than coverage of really important things, like the next leader of the free world, but it isn’t.  Celebrity news has evolved to the point where the viewer/consumer is in on the game too, rather than excluded.  Take Perez Hilton or TMZ or MrPaparazzi – they’re honest about PR.   Pictures of Gordon Brown eating an ice cream in the park?   Perez Hilton would draw cocks on the pictures in MS Paint.  The rest of the media would report them unedited.

Celebrity news is thought to attract viewers.  Does it represent a net gain in viewers, or temporary gains?    How loyal is an audience attracted by the saga of Britney Spears?  Can main-stream news channels compete with dedicated celebrity news outlets?  Has diversification in the name of popularity increased or decreased viewing figures for all channels that have gone down that route?  Is there an niche for news channels that  provide quality analysis of important news?  Is it possible to diversify to the point that what distinguishes a news channel is gone?  Do Perez Hilton and TMZ do a better job at covering the minutiae of celebrity news than CNN or the BBC?  What happens when they, and entities like Heat Magazine, get their own digital television channels?