Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

Overlooked: Paparazzi Vs. Surfers »

Posted by: Dakota 2 months, 1 week ago

8.9

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 170

Propped: 94

Comments: 61

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

Last weekend in Malibu, a group of paparazzi descended on the beach to take photos of actor Matthew McConaughy, who was surfing nearby. On this particular day, the group was confronted by a group of local surfers.

Read Full Story at newsquake.netscape.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 61

0%
libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago

The surfers need to be prosecuted.
Reply
12 Replies
- 0%
  Dionys2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Maybe. But if some nutjob or group of nutjobs was stalking me and my family, snapping photos of myself/family/children without permission 24/7 and putting peoples' lives at risk with their actions.. I'd wonder why *they* weren't being prosecuted.
  Reply
  10 Replies
  - 0%
    libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago
    
    If you were an all-purpose public figure, they wouldn't need permission so long as you are in public view.
    Hell, even private citizens have no right to demand someone not take their pictures while out in public. There has to be a "reasonable expectation" of privacy, and that doesn't exist in public places. Obviously, you'd be amazed at what constitutes a public area.
    Whose lives were at risk in this instance? No one's.
    Reply
    9 Replies
    - 0%
      Teech2 months, 1 week ago
      
      "The surfers need to be prosecuted."
      Absolutely. Those selfish, liberal, privileged little California punks need to be tied up, beaten, and bent over a surfboard so the paparazzi can line up and have George Bush sex with all of them! That public beach in Malibu, like ALL public beaches and national parks, needs to be privatized and put on a "for profit" basis. That will eliminate a huge expense for tax payers and keep those little sh!t surf punks away.
      Also, all that oil off the Malibu coast needs to drilled for NOW! Oil will go down to $20 a barrel as a result and too damn bad if a little oil and tar washes up on those environ-wacko, filthy Dem, rich liberals' beach.
      Reply
      5 Replies
      - 0%
        libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Ahh yes, another completely baseless and totally asinine rant having absolutely nothing to do with the real topic. At least you are consistent.
        Do you ever actually THINK, or is it always based on emotion for you?
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        0%
        Teech2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Well, Libs, since you asked a civil question and chose to attack the content of the post as opposed to the character of the posting person (a tactic I approve of wholeheartedly) I'll grace your question with a reply.
        THINK? sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on how much foam I expect from the mouths of the Cons I love to bait, or the Libs when I choose to rant from an opposite viewpoint. In any case, there is ALWAYS some emotion involved. Mea culpa. Sometimes, I just totally disengage the brain altogether and just let it spew! (Drives Slate crazy)
        But most of the time I post to get attention and see what other people feel, (emotion) or think regarding the topics that appear on Propellor.
        Damn...sometimes I ACTUALLY believe what I write! And I know that you don't take it personally when I neg everything you post on general principles. I certainly don't get bothered when you, and others, do likewise.
        A civil question always deserves a civil answer.
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        0%
        DanmLiberals2 months, 1 week ago
        
        As a fellow Cali. Surfer I find this absolutely hilarious. Paparazzi should know their limits and not Fock with the surf crowd. Where I live we have a big problem with the City people coming here, leaving their trash for us to pick up while they steal the waves and cut you off like nothing happened. Fights are a daily occurrence and knowing how surfers react these days, it's expected that they would feel they were having their toes stepped on by a bunch of idiot camera men. I often wondered how the paparazzi would feel every time they do something there is a camera in their face.
        Anyway, I don't understand how this became a political conversation. It's amazing how low you guys go to get a shot in on each other. We should start a Liberal vs. Con UFC and then really go at it.
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        0%
        Sabretooth2 months, 1 week ago
        
        "We should start a Liberal vs. Con UFC and then really go at it."
        Excellent idea, the only problem i can forsee is who would the cons get to do their fighting for them?
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        DanmLiberals2 months, 1 week ago
        
        The Marines and the whole military. After the Libs. tried to prosecute them and put them in prison, they arne't to happy with you. I say Murtha vs. one of the Marines he called cold blooded killers.
        Reply
    - 0%
      lfergie8122 months, 1 week ago
      
      libsRfunny
      "If you were an all-purpose public figure, they wouldn't need permission so long as you are in public view."
      Would you defend the actions of the paps that were after Princess Diana? Paparazzi chasing a speeding vehicle with cameras flashing in the driver's eyes. I don't understand why the paps weren't tried for vehicular manslaughter.
      Libs may be funny but neo-cons are ignorant.
      Reply
      2 Replies
      - 0%
        sjm2342 months, 1 week ago
        
        right just like Libs wouldnt need permission to kick the holy ******ttt out of the irritating little peckers who are rudely disrepecting libs privacy.
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        DanmLiberals2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Fergie, your comments are ignorant.
        Reply
- 0%
  jaern2 months, 1 week ago
  
  True, but its odd how important celebrities personal lives have become to ordinary people thus fueling the need for paparazzi to harass these people. I love watching movies and TV shows as much as the next person. I guess where I draw the line is I don't care what kind of undies they wear, foods they eat, or their extra curricular activities.
  Reply
0%
1-2-Oscar2 months, 1 week ago

Was this story really "Overlooked," or was it politely ignored as insignificant and uninteresting?
Reply
22 Replies
- 0%
  Aidenag2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Well i found it interesting, but i am a photographer. It's instances like these that made me start carrying a weapon with me whenever im shooting in public. Well that and the fact having $10k in equipment on me, makes me a muggers wet dream.
  Reply
  17 Replies
  - 0%
    1-2-Oscar2 months, 1 week ago
    
    I suppose that, as a photographer, you
    1. Claim the right to deprive well-known individual like Matthew McConaughy any opportunity to relax on a public beach and enjoy the activities that other beachgoers enjoy.
    2. Think it is your right to ""travel in packs, run red lights, make unsafe . . . U-turns in pursuit of their subject"
    3. Disparage the mothers of those who object to your intrusive behavior.
    and 4. Plan, with your critics "to have a huge rumble on the beach" to settle any differences.
    Are these the characteristics that make you a serious photographer, Aidenag?
    Wow, your life must be exciting.
    Reply
    13 Replies
    - 0%
      1-2-Oscar2 months, 1 week ago
      
      It's also somewhat disturbing that you not only support such behavior, you now will approach me armed with a weapon.
      Reply
      1 Reply
      - 0%
        PsychoHosebeast2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Oscar, could you point out exactly where it is that he said that he supports that kind of behavior that you describe, making it up as you go along (as you often seem to)? I'm having a lot of trouble finding it.
        Reply
    - 0%
      Aidenag2 months, 1 week ago
      
      Thank's for putting words in my mouth Oscar..
      I do not partake in that form of photography. I mostly do wildlife, nature, weddings and street photography. And was talking about photographers being attacked/assaulted in general. It happens more than just to paparazzi sleaze. And in 99% of cases, happens due to no fault of the photographer.
      As for "Depriving" a individual of their opportunity to relax, it's a public space Oscar. He, and the photographers both have just as much of a right to be there doing what they are doing.
      As for carrying a weapon, your damn right i do. Between the crazies and the people who look at my gear as a free meal-ticket worth more than most cars, i would be insane not to do so. If i had a dollar for every photog who had his equipment stolen or broken by others, i would be able to retire right now...
      Reply
      1 Reply
      - 0%
        earthlingerer2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Wherever I go, I'm always carrying a camera, whether it's my cellphone, camera, or my video recorder.
        If I see something, anything, person, thing or place, while I'm out, it's caught.
        It will be a pretty obvious sign when I stop and take out and prepare my phone or camera, so anyone can turn, whatever.
        But if you start to yell or run, I'll just walk away... having taken my pictures.
        I know there's rights for both sides.
        Reply
    - 0%
      PsychoHosebeast2 months, 1 week ago
      
      "Claim the right to deprive well-known individual like Matthew McConaughy any opportunity to relax on a public beach and enjoy the activities that other beachgoers enjoy."
      He gave up that right by the profession and lifestyle he has chosen. He doesn't need to head to a massively populated place to enjoy the beach, and a public beach is certainly no place for ANYONE to expect privacy.
      Reply
      7 Replies
      - 0%
        peaquod2 months, 1 week ago
        
        You might feel differently if suddenly the paps found you and your personal private life so interesting that you couldn't go out to eat or a park without being dogged by these creeps....
        Every one deserves a little down time....I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't like to have your every public move documented...and published.
        Every one has something to hide.....
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        foksipayne2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Besides, what is soooooo interesting about someone doing a recreational activity? If he was just walking the beach, whoop ti do, and if he was surfing, it might be fun to watch on video, but a photo?
        Reply
      - 0%
        libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago
        
        "He gave up that right by the profession and lifestyle he has chosen. He doesn't need to head to a massively populated place to enjoy the beach, and a public beach is certainly no place for ANYONE to expect privacy."
        I'm in extremely rare agreement with Psycho. McConaughy is what in legal terms in known as an "all-purpose public figure." That means he has sought out public adoration and to some extent forfeits rights accorded to ordinary private citizens.
        Anyone on a public beach is in public view. The photographers were not up in his face nor infringing upon his right to enjoy his surfing. They were standing quite a ways away from the surfing area with zoom lenses.
        The surfer Nazis took exception to their presence and violated the photographers' rights, as affirmed by many federal court decisions.
        If the surfers really thought it was a problem, they should have called the cops. Instead, they acted like thugs and assaulted a photographer.
        Reply
      - 0%
        Dionys2 months, 1 week ago
        
        "He gave up that right by the profession and lifestyle he has chosen. "
        Garbage. He didn't give up any rights that every single average citizen retains. Just because someone is more well known than another person doesn't mean they should expect to be stalked, chased and put in danger by people with no basic morals, ethics or understanding.
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        0%
        libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago
        
        "Just because someone is more well known than another person doesn't mean they should expect to be stalked, chased and put in danger by people with no basic morals, ethics or understanding."
        Someone's getting all emotional.
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        0%
        slyboy22 months, 1 week ago
        
        Dionys is right. I've mentioned in other posts before that actors are entertainers and chose their profession to entertain people through films/shows, not to be stalked in real life. That's what reality tv is for (and even then it's usually fake). I seriously doubt that our president ( just as much of a public figure) would allow such paparazzi to follow him around day and be harassed.
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        decipher2 months, 1 week ago
        
        i've heard that even the president isn't immune. it think they're called the press, and i hear they do follow him around. after that there's the white house staff photographer... all awful, dirty little people.
        Reply
    - 0%
      Charlson2 months, 1 week ago
      
      You assume quite a bit. Do you know whether Aidenag is guilty of any of these claims? And I gave you a pos by mistake when I was trying to post under your assumptions.
      Reply
  - 0%
    PsychoHosebeast2 months, 1 week ago
    
    "Well that and the fact having $10k in equipment on me"
    Reminds me of the SNL skit with Al Franken wearing a half million dollars worth of satellite broadcasting equipment on his back, broadcasting "live from in front of this crack house..." Then suddenly the broadcast goes dead.
    Reply
  - 0%
    decipher2 months, 1 week ago
    
    me too a. i like to make positive comments about people with my work but there is such a negative attitude toward photographers now that i have to be extremely careful where and when i pull out the gear. it's sad to think that we would never have so many treasures from people like henri cartier bresson, or dorthea lange had they existed in this same climate. i'd like to see asmp and apa get on this big time.
    Reply
  - 0%
    pongping2 months, 1 week ago
    
    Walk where tigers stalk and you might end up as dinner. Let photographers beware. Bet they never saw those "hills have eyes" flicks.
    Reply
- 0%
  dissent2 months, 1 week ago
  
  i found it interesting too. there's a bunch of curious social dynamics going on here that are worth thinking about coz they tell us a lot about what we are as culture. the surfers are as much a part of the same bs game as both the paparazzi and the celebrity. they "protect" their "star" and throw in the usual surfer subculture crap about "their" beach. it's all entertainment taken way too seriously by everyone
  Reply
  2 Replies
  - 0%
    PsychoHosebeast2 months, 1 week ago
    
    Few people realize that many SoCal surfers are little more than immature wannabe thugs with drug-addled brains, usually drunk and underage. They'd just as soon be kicking McConaughy's ass, but they know they'd get their butts stomped into grease spots if they tried. Only a handful could actually be classified as "atheletes."
    Reply
    1 Reply
    - 0%
      libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago
      
      Probably was more of a "surf n turf protection" deal than anything.
      Reply
- 0%
  foksipayne2 months, 1 week ago
  
  I found it interesting, too. But that might only be, because he's a cutie.lol
  Reply
0%
1-2-Oscar2 months, 1 week ago

Drapeau'd again!
Reply
0%
Dicax_Maximus2 months, 1 week ago

PUKIMONS - SPAM - Reported.
Reply
0%
Dicax_Maximus2 months, 1 week ago

Is it only me, but I find it a tad ironic that a lump of SPAM sit's on a member of Propeller's story FOR over 6 hours ??
Reply
2 Replies
- 0%
  PsychoHosebeast2 months, 1 week ago
  
  I think the word you're looking for is "typical," not "ironic."
  Reply
- 0%
  Charlson2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Someones not doing their job in a timely manner? Not here on Propeller, no can't be.
  Reply
0%
dissent2 months, 1 week ago

celebrities and paparazzi have a symbiotic relationship. celebrities by definition are public property. the paparazzi feed public interest. do celebrities think they get paid millions of dollars to work for a few weeks on a movie or whatever it is that is their celebrated trade because they're "good"? get real! sure they just want to be left alone but they really need to put things in perspective here. they are only who they are because people talk about them, idolize them and turn them into demi-gods and then cough up the bucks that pay their astronomical salaries. if they have no public exposure nobody's talking, idolizing, worshiping or buying. paparazzi stoke public interest. if they break the law then they should be arrested, fined, whatever like anybody else would if they'd done the same. surfers beating them up is just a tribal meathead mentality. the ugly side of surfer culture. and i'd say there's a little possessive obsession with said celebrity going on there too
Reply
2 Replies
- 0%
  peaquod2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Sorry but that is really naive... Sure public figures are dependent on publicity....however, that does not mean they become your personal property.....
  They are also entiltled to a life..outside of their job just like you.
  The Paps...really only want to 'catch' these celebs in some sort of compromising position so they can make big bucks on the backs of others.... The worse situation the better....How can you defend that sort of behavior??? Would it be all right if they were dogging you?
  
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    dissent2 months, 1 week ago
    
    you're suffering comprehension deficiency. i said public property NOT personal property as you say i did. big difference. the first is that celebrities are a commodity with a price tag -- that's the biz. the second is that they are people who are the victims of stalkers -- for that there are laws. if the paparazzi are stalkers that's for the law to decide. as for being entitled to a life outside of their job try and find yourself a lawyer who can write that into a contract and make it stick. good luck. there's plenty of jobs that own you 24/7. celebrities are no different. if the paps are looking for compromising snaps it's because that's what sells, if it sells it means somebody's buying and that means, lo and behold, the public. go figure. and you call me naive. lol
    Reply
0%
toph19732 months, 1 week ago

The one stalkerazzi has it right when disparraging the people that read the scandal rags. If no one bought the filth they put out there would be no need for the scum that are the stalkerazzi. Sure, they have the right to make a living, but so do hookers (which as far as I'm concerned is a much more legitimate profession). I'm not going to shed any tears hearing about people or celebs beating up scum like these.
Reply
0%
Wolfie20072 months, 1 week ago

The best thing in this article was the surfers telling the photographers to get a real job! LMAO
Reply
4 Replies
- 0%
  Charlson2 months, 1 week ago
  
  And they didn't even realize how tenuous their position was.
  Reply
- 0%
  KobraJeedai2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Yo' Duuuuude, you should, like get a real job, yknow. Like surfin'
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    peaquod2 months, 1 week ago
    
    Yo' Duuuude...surfing is not a poor person's sport.....
    Reply
- 0%
  pongping2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Wolfie, for once I am in complete agreement with you, unless of course you also meant those wedding photographers - why that's a real job - sort of, maybe, I think, isn't it?!
  Reply
0%
miklkit2 months, 1 week ago

Having done a little surfing and diving ( and having the scars to prove it), I'm with the surfers on this one. Does anyone still remember what caused the wreck that killed Princess Diana?
Reply
10 Replies
- 0%
  Charlson2 months, 1 week ago
  
  Alcohol and a driver who drank it?
  Reply
  4 Replies
  - 0%
    peaquod2 months, 1 week ago
    
    Of course the fact that they were being chased by a pack of wolves had nothing whatsoever to do with it.....
    Pleeeeese!
    Reply
    2 Replies
    - 0%
      decipher2 months, 1 week ago
      
      wolves bent on what horror? ah, the evil photograph. why was it necessary for the car to speed away?... what was the danger? a picture?
      Reply
    - 0%
      foksipayne2 months, 1 week ago
      
      I'm sure it didn't help.
      Reply
  - 0%
    lfergie8122 months, 1 week ago
    
    Charlson
    Alcohol or no alcohol, when you're driving, you don't need a camera flash in your eyes. It causes temporary blindness long enough to lose control especially on a curve into an underpass.
    Reply
- 0%
  Global_Warmer2 months, 1 week ago
  
  "Does anyone still remember what caused the wreck that killed Princess Diana?"
  Yeah, I do. It was her assh ole chauffeur driving at 110 mph because they didn't want their picture taken.
  Reply
  4 Replies
  - 0%
    libsRfunny2 months, 1 week ago
    
    Tinted windows would have been a smarter option.
    Reply
    3 Replies
    - 0%
      lfergie8122 months, 1 week ago
      
      The side windows were tinted. They took pictures through the windshield and back window. Imagine the driver seeing a camera flash through the rear view mirror.
      Reply
      2 Replies
      - 0%
        Global_Warmer2 months, 1 week ago
        
        Imagine the driver an idiot with no regard for human life as he recklessly drove away at mach 2. He not only killed his passengers, he endandered everyone else on the road.
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        decipher2 months, 1 week ago
        
        but they might have been shot gw.
        Reply