Celebrity fame: perks and drawbacks come with the profession

Celebrities and other major figures can live notoriously difficult lives when it comes to privacy. But do they have the right to complain? Like Tiger Woods, well-known figures everywhere are in a perpetual war with the media to keep their lives to themselves.

This issue, like countless others, is not a matter of one side being irresponsible and the other not. Celebrities have a right to complain, but the truth is both the observer and celebrity are bound to their responsibilities. Celebrities, like all people, have a right to privacy. Tiger Woods, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Britney Spears are not X-Men, superheroes or members of a separate species, but rather human beings who deserve just as much privacy as any of us.

Is there such a thing as too much privacy? Privacy is an ostensible right, just like breathing. The trouble is it can be difficult to protect if your life is the prey of droves of paparazzi who can earn thousands of dollars by taking your picture. According to answer.com, a shot of Paris Hilton can fetch $50,000. With these tasty sums to be made, it's no wonder the paparazzi seem to grow on trees. With this in mind, it's important to consider the element of human psychology before blaming just the intruders.

While there is no such a thing as too much privacy, there is such a thing as price of fame and the precautions to be made. It is the responsibility of the aspiring celebrity to weigh the possibilities of the job against the corresponding level of privacy. You can't expect to jump into a lion's den without the risk of being mauled, and the same applies to positions of potential publicity. The trick is to know in advance. Did you just become famous after starring in a Hollywood blockbuster and are surprised and upset? You've been warned. Unless people lose interest in your life there is little you can do. To complain of a lack of privacy is okay, but complaints of the job lacking privacy are unjustified in that one could learn in advance.

Observers of a famous person's life have their responsibilities. Regardless of the money to be made by intruding on people's lives, the media and paparazzi could use a little courtesy. It's not all right to stand outside someone's doorway to take a picture as soon as they leave. The lengths people can go to make a quick buck are outrageous, but wouldn't the gratification from leaving someone alone be greater than the money earned from obstructing someone's life? If we could experience a life of intrusion on people's lives and compare it with a life of leaving them alone, I'm sure the vast majority would prefer the latter. Treat others the way you want to be treated. The philosophy is simple.

While there may be a profit incentive to invading people's lives, what about the natural inclination to just know? We can't help but want to know about Tiger Woods' love life, right? This may hold true in many cases, but we should try our best to suppress these urges. In fact, no suppression is needed and all it takes is knowing they're just like us. We are the ones who exalt them to superhuman status and it's us who can reverse that. Once you know that we contain virtually the same DNA and experience most of the same life troubles, you'll suddenly realize you care much less. If we can set a precedent for leaving someone alone, for example a scandal involving a movie star and we collectively agree to just leave it be, that would be great. A precedent can lead to a habit and eventually common sense.