"...from here on in, anything negative that happens to you has been instantly rendered hilarious. Lost your mind? Haaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaa. Lost your children? Haaaaa haaaaa haaaaa. Here's hoping you get drunk and stumble into a threshing machine so we can print out the pictures and stick them on the office noticeboard and laugh till our noses run."One point he doesn't make here, so I will: Why is it assumed that - because somebody promotes their career in light entertainment by courting the newspapers - that they automatically become fair game for any amount of intrusion, ridicule, insult, baiting or blackmailing? And what about the people around them? Their families and friends?
I know that in a half-educated media-studies sort of way, they have signed a formal contract in which they get celeb-related revenue in return for all of the above, but .... well... they haven't really, have they? It's a bit like 'constitutional issues' in this country. We haven't got a constitution.
I'd strain this point as far as, but not beyond, the notion of the Social Contract. The Social Contract is a big thing - it's what stands between us and a Hobbesian State of Nature. It's so big, and so central to every aspect of our life, that we can be considered to have signed it. But The British Constitution? Or The Celebrity Treaty With The Tabloids?
Being a good metaphor doesn't make it a good fact, does it?