|
|
It'd help if you posted some links to details about it. Who? Where? When? If the person was arrested for assault or whatever, and there was a justified legal reason for doing so, then I've got no problem with it being in the paper; I'd ignore it and move on to something more exciting, really. I do know that one of them's been in/out of rehab lately (AJ?) and so if it's him, I wouldn't think it a stunt - just another day in the office, really.
What makes you say, particularly, that it was a publicity stunt? Some members of S Club 7 (I think?) were busted smoking pot in Covent Garden last year (details hazy) and it got them a whole stack of coverage (and opprobrium, in some cases) but I don't think it was a stunt per se. How do you separate them? I doubt any record company is going to be stupid enough to tell their artists to go out and get themselves arrested for the sake of sales; if it gets to that level, then surely someone's advertising/marketing arse needs firing?
I think the coverage given these things is also due to most people's scab-picking predilections. This counts as much as the company push, I think, maybe more. After all, the only thing worse than a star gone to pot is a star gone to pot in public, where we can scruitinise their every embarrassment and past-glory-raping telethon-hosting moment of tragedy.
This does, of course, verge into the interminable cockfight of "what is talent? how do you know when it's gone?" that has no clear winner. And ergo, is probably not that easy to just slip into the law.
Ideally, though, certain people should be prohibited from recording ever again. I'd be happiest if Elton John stayed with his mail ad, y'know - unless I could be guaranteed a return to form. But this hinges on my being made Supreme Ruler Of Everything Nifty, which is an outside bet, really.
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: The Return Of Rothkoid ] |
|
|