THE PRICE OF BEING FAMOUS: THE HARASSMENT OF THE PAPARAZZI.
At 00.23 hours on August 31, 1997, a luxury vehicle suffered a brutal accident while driving at high speed through the streets of Paris. The place of the accident, the emblematic Bridge of the Soul of the French capital.
Almost three and a half hours later, Diana of Wales, former daughter-in-law of Queen Elizabeth of England and a regular cover of gossip magazines, passed away.
Lady Di was only 36 years old. Her companion and partner of hers, also deceased, billionaire Dodi Al-Fayed, 42 years old.
Although the result of the investigations of what happened pointed to a possible intake of alcohol and drugs by the driver, it was immediately known that the excessive speed of the car was due to an attempt to escape from several of the paparazzi who were chasing her to capture snapshots, undoubtedly highly prized, of the famous couple.
During much of this atypical year 2020, coinciding with our confinement forced by the State of Alarm, there have been many Spaniards who have dedicated themselves to photographing celebrities leaning out of the balcony to applaud the toilets or even going out to the street to walk to the dog.
Anything goes in this society in which with a mobile phone the complexes of an amateur are filled, such as a spy, a policeman, a model, a photographer and now also, paparazzi.
In colloquial terms, photography professionals are known as paparazzi, who work either as an employee or independently, obtaining images for the so-called pink press or the heart.
The word is an Italian term, plural for Paparazzo, which became popular in the wake of the film La dolce vita, by Federico Fellini.
And that's the name of an unscrupulous photographer who walked the Via Veneto in Rome, eager to obtain images of famous people.
Who writes these lines, unfortunately this summer stopped for more than a second in front of the screen, to see one of them.
And a few moments were more than enough for me to decide to change the channel, after listening to a live interview with a well-known paparazzi, who came to recognize that among the garbage there are real treasures of the intimate lives of celebrities, including photographs that may be taken advantage of.
At some point, did his setmates show upset at this scavenger activity of the reporter, who was proud of such a feat?
Absolutely.
They even laughed at him when he pointed out that sometimes "errands" could be found not as pleasant as a baby's dirty diapers.
Obnoxious and nauseating. And we are not referring precisely to the diapers of innocent creatures.
Unlike other photographers, who work in sessions already arranged with the interested party, the paparazzi look for the indiscreet or "stolen" photo, without their knowledge, and much less without their consent, which generates many incidents, as we will see, arriving even to be described in full movement #me too, as a form of sexual harassment by certain actresses, which certainly has nothing to do, in our modest opinion.
It is true that with the use of new technologies and especially social networks, the work of intrepid and reckless photographers has decreased for the simple reason that they leave little margin for their employers or buyers of their photographic work, being recurrent that celebrities have an account on Instagram in which they publish photos of their intimate life, openly, some of them certainly ridiculous.
A diverse issue are the snapshots that capture romances or relationships of celebrities that may interest readers of the pink press, although many of them, sooner or later, will be in charge of making official before the media how happy they are together, without need to hide.
And it has even gone so far as to simulate that the photos are apparently taken indiscreetly, to give the snapshot greater impact, when the truth is that the "clandestine" shot had already been previously approved.
In any case, we face not only a legal debate, but also a moral one, since the vast majority of celebrities live off their fame and exposure to others, without a priori it being easy to determine where the limit is. of his public and private life, especially when it is the celebrities themselves who tend to put a price on their privacy to the highest bidder.
For this reason, on some occasions, rather than feeling aggrieved by a violation of their privacy, their disappointment lies in the fact that they will not receive a large sum of money for images obtained against their will.
Be that as it may, we are not talking now about a civil wrongful act, such as the violation of the right to privacy and self-image, but about confrontations with the paparazzi that have led to unpleasant situations that have ended in the Investigating Court, after complaints of threats, insults, injuries and even harassment.
However, it is not easy for an accusation of harassment to succeed, taking into account that the fit in the new article 172 ter of the penal code is more than questionable, unless the celebrity is extremely jealous with his privacy and there has actually been a conduct continuous and hostile.
It was not the case, for example, of what happened in 2018 by the tonadillera Isabel, who complained about the harassment of a paparazzi in a shopping center, since the Seville Prosecutor's Office interested in the file of the case, being in a public place and without insistent and repeated harassment, as required by Article 172 ter.
In future publications we will have the opportunity to refer to the so-called crime of harassment of individuals, which contains said precept.
Known as stalking (damn Anglicisms), the criminal type establishes a prison sentence of three months to two years or a fine of six to twenty-four months for whoever harasses a person by insisting and repeatedly carrying out surveillance, and without being legitimately authorized. , the persecution or search for their physical proximity and thus seriously alter the development of their daily life, without prejudice to the penalties that may correspond to the crimes in which the acts of harassment have taken place.
Typically, the celebrity, feeling followed by a paparazzi, limits himself to covering his face and tries to escape from it so as not to be photographed.
Others take the siege with a sense of humor, making fun of them with faces, hiding in a childish way or even wearing ridiculous clothes, aware of the presence of the paparazzi; This is the case of Dustin Hoffman, Jim Carrey, Benedict Cumberbatch or Jennifer Lawrence, by the way, one of the most affected by the spread of selfies in which she appeared naked.
But the problem arises when, already in full freedom of movement and movement, celebrities confront and face professional paparazzi, which leads to episodes that usually end with complaints, as we have seen.
For example, the singer David Busdamente, who was about to suffer a traffic accident, after being followed by a photographer, which gave rise to a strong discussion and struggle, coming to denounce each other, although afterwards they did not proceed with the accusations .
Greater controversy occurs when celebrities are accompanied by their young children, who often suffer episodes of distress.
And it is that children, as minors, must be untouchable, no matter how much their faces are later digitally hidden in publications.
In this sense, perhaps the geographical area that gathers the largest number of celebrities per square meter is California, and especially Hollywood.
Well, sensitized with the protection of minors and after not a little debate and many initiatives, among them those of the actresses Halle Berry and Jennifer Garner, successive Governors have run against the paparazzi, with the approval of laws that establish prison sentences and high fines for taking photographs and videos of a minor without the consent of their parents and in a hostile manner.
Singer Shakira, who already in 2015 stated in the Argentine newspaper ClarÃn that "the greatest harassment comes from the paparazzi," and who has denounced various photographers on several occasions who persecute her when she is with her children on the public highway, in addition to besieging her day after day, standing guard near her home or being attentive to rummaging through her garbage.
Because if we talk about garbage, that adjective comes in handy to talk about certain television programs to which, for reasons of mental hygiene, it is not advisable to stop for a second.
