Celebrities are a pampered bunch and I believe that a reasonable amount of paparazzi shots and public criticism are the prices they pay for their exalted status.
Some things, though, are sacred, and weddings should be one of them.
That's why the photos that have emerged of Reese Witherspoon and Jim Toth's weekend wedding are really p*ssing me off.
Reese, perhaps crazily, opted to marry her talent agent beau in a ceremony under a tent outside her Ojai, California home.
Dozens of photos were taken of the big event ...
All from the sky.
That means they came from helicopters.
Helicopters.
Over a wedding ceremony.
Is nothing off limits to the paparazzi?
And the photographers were pretty relentless, taking shot after shot after shot from the sky of wedding guests, including a couple making out in what they thought was a secluded spot around the corner.
Gah.
As a bride, I would be beside myself if my carefully planned big day went off not to the gentle strains of "Canon in D", but the ground-shaking whir of helicopter blades.
One also has to wonder, though, why Reese didn't make her wedding more of a secret, or take the whole thing indoors, which is what I probably would have done had I been her.
However, I firmly believe that she shouldn't have had to. Paparazzi need a code of ethics to follow. I'd like to see them agree as professionals not to photograph the children of celebrities unless they have the parent's permission. And I think helicopter shots of weddings and funerals should be completely off-limits.
What do you think?
Image via Splash News
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
This Hot Dad Wants to Cook You Dinner
This Hot Dad Cooks AND Does the Dishes
Kanye West is Gay?! 
Comments 92
Yes I think the paparazzi are disgusting and something should be able to be done on some level. Poor Brittney Spears lost her mind, Pam and Tommy lost their marriage, and Princess Diana lost her life due to these ruthless creeps.
In some countries, paparazzi don't have the free access they do in USA. Yes, there has to be a code of ethics but when George Clooney 'scolded' them after Princess Di's death, they boycotted him at his next movie. It's about human decency and nowadays it's getting worse because there are bidding wars between all the celebrity websites so it's all about the almighty dollar. Oprah said they'd all sue if it didn't take so much time and money for them but I think once in a while someone has to do it, just to set an example. All in all, I think this is a high price to pay for the first amendment rights.
Helicopters ... How Sick !!!!!!!!!!!!!
As public figures, celebrities like Reese Witherspoon are not entitled to the same amount of privacy as private figures are. That's the law. (It's a tradeoff for fame and fortune.)
That being said, the only way I could imagine stopping the paparazzi from being to intrusive is to somehow convince all the tabloid mags to stop paying big bucks for the photos they take from their helicopters. Because it all boils down to money. Those photographers do outrageous things because they can make money from it...because some tacky tabloid pays them for their efforts. I don't even really think there's a way to stop that, but wouldn't it be nice?
We can do something to help this problem, you know. Stop buying the crap at the checkout line. I know it's fun to read the tabloids, I'm as guilty as some, more than others. But less than most. I'll read the headlines at the checkout line, but rarely buy them. And honestly, the only time I do buy them is when there's good stuff going on - "A Photoshoot with Celebrity Lady with her dogs in her New Home!" kind of a thing.
The only thing, unfortunately, that's really going to stop the paparazzi craziness is the money falling out of it. We saw with Diana that even death does not stop them. Money talks, and you can bet that one of their biggest income spikes came as a result of that tragedy.
Stop buying the crap. Stop frequenting the websites. It starts with us.
P.S. Did anyone check the toxicology report of bodyguard Who was driving Princess Diana? http://alcoholism.about.com/library/blrees02.htm
Just because one can do something doesn't mean one should do something. Paparazzi invasions of personal events are tasteless and rude, but the consumers of their product are to blame. The public eats up reality tv and celebrity scandal to the point that it's almost impossible to ignore. Public figures should expect to be photographed when they're in public, but homes and kids should be off limits. Maybe this is why so many young celebrities have substance abuse issues. Imagine being in a fishbowl 24/7 and never having the solace of privacy!
"As public figures, celebrities like Reese Witherspoon are not entitled to the same amount of privacy as private figures are. That's the law. (It's a tradeoff for fame and fortune.)"
Why is that the law though? I really don't understand that? Why am I entitled to be protected from a stalker but they aren't? I mean that is essentially what these people are? (stalkers)