If celebrities fascinate us (and they do) and babies are cute (and a lot of them are), it makes sense that the public would want to see the babies of celebrities. Kind of. But how did we get from, "Hey, there's Suri Cruise, an adorable, famous person's baby!" to "Hey, there's the grown child of a famous person! Let's see if he puts on his slouchy jeans one pants leg at a time!"? When did the merging of fame-by-association and reality TV become not only accepted, but expected? Was it Paris Hilton and her "reality" show, "The Simple Life," which launched in 2003? Paris' fame-by-wealth status minted the term "celebutante." As if that wasn't painful enough (and it really was), now cameras seem compelled to also follow the famous-by-inheritance, which we are sorely tempted to call "celebrats."
(Except when I call Gene Simmons' honestly delightful-seeming kids "KISSebrities.")
Why Are All of These People On The Small Screen? and, Hey! I Was Eating That!
(Sweet! MSN has an open message board at the end of the piece, where readers can leave comments about how jealous I must be because I don't have my own show, and how the article makes me look fat.)
2 comments:
Starring is spelled with two r's.
Staring is the act of looking at another person
Thank you, oh Anonymous Proofreader!
Unfortunately, the fine folks at MSN get a wee testy if I hack my way into their pages to rewrite copy, so I simply avoid my eyes once something is up.
Post a Comment