Nicole Kidman At The Tavern Restaurant For A Meeting

 

In September 2013, we reported that a new California law passed that altered the way celebrities are treated by paparazzi. The law, heavily supported by actresses Halle Berry and Jennifer Garner, prevents paparazzi from snapping photos and video of children of politicians, judges, lawmakers, and celebrities without consent from the parent.  The law comes with a sentence of six months in jail and a $1,000 fine (per incident) if found guilty. Signed and entered into legislation by Gov. Jerry Brown, the paparazzi bill went into affect on January 1, 2014.

 

This week, two additional bills won approval by Democratic Assemblyman, Richard Bloom, and sent to Senate. AB1256 and AB1356 are bills that hold a little more weight than the initial one and are intended for the more aggressive paparazzi.

 

One of the bills makes it illegal to interfere with someone trying to enter or leave a building. Bloom said it was not about paparazzi but about protecting children and others who are affected by aggressive photographers at places such as schools and hospitals. That bill, AB1256, was approved on a 52-16 vote.

 

“You need to see it to believe it,” Bloom said, referring to the crush of photographers who can suddenly descend and “poke cameras in the face of small children. It is very, very frightening.”

 

The other bill would expand the state’s definition of stalking to include unwanted surveillance that has no legitimate purpose. Bloom said the surveillance would still need to meet other criteria for stalking, including that a credible threat had been made, and the subject fears for their safety and at least once demanded to be left alone.

 

That bill passed 52-15.

 

Both bills were met with opposition. A Republican Assemblyman from Irvine, California preached that AB1356 (in particular) infringed upon the First Amendment and may stifle the media’s ability to perform permissible news gathering.

 

berry

 

 

So, the question is…is this true?

 

News media outlets understand the importance of exclusive content. Outlets with quality content, which includes exclusive photos, tend to do better with readership. They rely on paparazzi to go out and capture photos that are news worthy and one-of-a-kind. Readership numbers translates into advertising and subscription revenue. Under these new laws, news outlets will find themselves struggling to obtain photos that have (for years) proven to be a most valuable.

 

Celebrity kids has a certain attraction to the public. Who are the celebrity parents? Does the baby favor the mom more than the dad? These are some things we, the public, are intrigued by. So, these outlets all fight to give us what we want. Paparazzi, in turn, go out in the streets and fight for the “money shots” by any means necessary. They want to get paid the big bucks. So, photographers risk their lives and the lives of others. Unfortunately, celebrity adults aren’t the only ones being attacked. Kids are too.

 

Hopefully, paparazzi will use better judgement now when taking these photos. If not, jail time will hinder their talent. And as for the money, photographers will only find themselves breaking even because they’ll keep disobeying the law and have to pay huge fines.

 

 

DO YOU THINK THE PAPARAZZI LAWS WILL HELP OR HINDER THE MEDIA?