ONTD

me2 karma_s_bitch
12:41 pm - 07/18/2011

Olivia Wilde Blasts Media For Focusing On Celebs


Actress Olivia Wilde has blasted America's tabloid media bosses for ignoring global problems and focusing on gossip about reality TV celebrities.

The Tron: Legacy star has taken aim at reporters for perpetuating a fascination with reality TV stars because today's youth aren't being educated on current affairs.

The beauty tells America's fashion publication Marie Claire, "I'd like to refocus everyone's attention away from the Kardashians and onto Doctors Without Borders or aid workers. Let's redefine scandal. Scandal is not who so-and-so is dating; scandal is the fact that 1.2 million people are still living in tents in Haiti, and cholera is rampant because Nepalese U.N. soldiers dumped s**t from their Porta-Potties (portable toilets) into the river.

"That's a f**king scandal. If the average 15 year old was hearing about that instead of so-and-so's plastic surgery or cheating in Hollywood, I'd feel better about our future."

Source
Leave a Comment
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 02:47 pm (UTC)
i dont think she perpetuates any scandal about herself, i just think it's naive and hypocritical to get on a soapbox about people paying too much attention to her own line of work when her projects and her fame are due to the publicity she is complaining about.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 03:04 pm (UTC)
i think we all can have a healthy dose of celebrity gossip with real news; she's not forcing anybody to choose this or that, but it's just a fact that the wrong stuff is being put out there to make $$$ most of the time. celebrity gossip is perpetuating cnn--wtf was hugh heffner doing on cnn the other night talking about his breakup with a 24 year old?

regardless i don't all actors need or even want the fame to have steady work. it's clear which ones do (i actually think olivia is treading that territory), but most are fine without it.
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 03:08 pm (UTC)
sorry to say, if you want to become more prominent and get steady work, then publicity and fame is what you want. it's why i don't buy the excuse that people in hollywood just want to act for the sake of their art--you have to be fundamentally incredibly narcissistic to even begin to want this lifestyle.

i'd like for some real news to be put out, sure--how about things like the extent to which disney participates in horrible exploitative neoliberalism? wait, that might make olivia wilde look bad since she clearly didn't mind taking the Tron: Legacy role to boost her career.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 03:36 pm (UTC)
if you want to become more prominent and get steady work, then publicity and fame is what you want.

and there's nothing wrong with that but most actors aren't. steadily working actors =/= aren't the ones we keep hearing about and seeing. rose byrne, glenn close, meryl streep, jeff bridges, julianne moore, bryan cranston, idris elba, sandra oh, amy poehler, katey sagal, etc., etc. are just a few names on top of my head from shows i watch.. of course they have to do promotion for their projects, but they'd be happy and working without personal name recognition and use their celebrity to do charity without some underlining need for public approval.
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 03:41 pm (UTC)
Just because we don't hear or see about them as much as the Kardashians doesn't mean that their careers don't depend on publicity the same way.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 03:47 pm (UTC)
lol wut. just the fact that all of the actors i listed went to school, are educated on their craft and/or worked for decades to get where they are establishes that they are out of the kardashian's league. but no, meryl streep and amy poehler aren't successful because they rely on their sex lives or how much weight they can lose in a month to promote their work and activism.
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 03:49 pm (UTC)
You are not getting my point. Publicity doesn't equal doing the same things for attention, but it does equal attention for the sake of furthering one's career. They depend on publicity to promote their work, to promote their participation said work, and according to your logic, draw attention to important issues. Media is a large part of that.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 03:51 pm (UTC)
According to your logic, everybody would be qualified for the same jobs and come out with the same knowledge just because they go to the same school then?
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 03:54 pm (UTC)
No, but they're still working at the same purpose--getting an education. Everyone that you just mentioned is working at the same purpose--to have a career in Hollywood, whether they are all on the same degrees or no.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 04:31 pm (UTC)
And that goal is met differently. Some cheat, some half-ass, others work hard and go beyond what is required.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 03:54 pm (UTC)
And if this is what you have a problem with, it's a waste of your time because you're hating her for something she never implied or argued.
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 03:55 pm (UTC)
I've already stated what I have an issue with, I'm debating the points that *you* have brought up.
revertigo 18th-Jul-2011 04:11 pm (UTC)
But your whole point is Olivia--and even added, Hollywood in extension--can't make a credible point because she uses her celebrity status to do it, which is a logic fallacy in itself. That she and her colleagues are no better than the Kardashians just because they use the media to promote their work while ignoring the different degrees and standards both the actors and media have (like WTF is CNN doing interviewing Hugh Heffner) just to force your argument.
inboots 18th-Jul-2011 04:13 pm (UTC)
if i could buy anyone on the internet a meal or a drink of their choice right this second, that person would be you. just putting this out there.
jeveuxmacaron 18th-Jul-2011 04:36 pm (UTC)
:-D
Leave a comment
This page was loaded May 26th 2013, 3:22 am GMT.