RSS Feeds
Even Rachael Ray's Audience Can't Get Excited About Awful, Faux Paparazzi Service
Posted by Defamer Hollywood at 10:50 AM on July 31, 2008
Perhaps inspired by the Britney-prompted downturn in paparazzi profits, former commercial photographer Tania Cowher has come up with a novel (yet terrible) solution: allowing non-celebrities to hire their own personal paparazzi via her service Celeb 4 a Day. After all, who among us hasn't yearned to be stalked by a loudmouthed photographer screaming, "Over here! Look over here, you bitch!" on the way to Walgreens? The answer is "almost everyone," at least if this clip from Rachael Ray is the judge. After grilling Cowher, Ray asks the audience to raise their hand if they'd use the service themselves, soliciting a feeble response. Next time, Tania, try Oprah: the audience will scream in pleasure when O yells "You get Getty Images! You get an X17 subscription! EVERYONE GETS A BAUER-GRIFFIN LOGIN!"
Perhaps inspired by the
Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
kookla
Posted 11:45 AM 31/7/08
Puhleeze. You know Rachael is getting a business card from Cowher and having her people arrange a personal paparazzi as soon as she leaves the studio.
kookla
Losin_it
Posted 11:43 AM 31/7/08
It's a good thing for a first date...meet him/her with a swarm of (hired) paps surrounding you, begging for your picture.
When they suddenly decide to leave you alone and never return, you'll probably have some explaining to do, of course.
Losin_it
whitekidinflatbush
Posted 6:02 PM 31/7/08
I must love this post for the random Walgreens reference, and not just because I used to work there.
whitekidinflatbush
raincoaster
Posted 8:42 PM 31/7/08
I totally want to be in that audience. Know when the taping is?
raincoaster
Oxycontinmoron
Posted 11:35 PM 31/7/08
Is there a message in there somewhere perhaps? Like, if you're not willing to have someone follow you around all day every day, and you over there are not interested in having every move you make documented, and you sir, in the back, you don't want someone shoving a camera or microphone in your face and taunting you to get a reaction;
then why the fuck do you support having it done to other people just because they're famous?!
Oxycontinmoron
Breadbowl
Posted 12:32 AM 1/8/08
@ oxycontinmoron Good point. But add in that you get to be paid obscene amounts of money for essentially playing "pretend" and get access to things we mere mortals can't and see changes their mind. Whether they like it or not, the paps help make them famous.
Breadbowl
Oxycontinmoron
Posted 1:36 AM 1/8/08
@Breadbowl: It's the age-old argument of art versus commerce. There's a difference between wanting to be an actor and wanting to be famous. (John Malkovich, Robert DeNiro, Dustin Hoffman et al. could give a shit about being famous, right?) "Famous" is a business construct. Acting is an art. Do they go hand-in-hand? Yes. To what extent is the question.
Oxycontinmoron
AlastairAbas
Posted 2:25 PM 31/7/08
I just read the words "Even Rachel Ray's" and wondered if Rachel Ray was going to be playing Evan Rachel Wood's part in a twisted drama about a TV cook turned toward the dark side of food by Bobby Flay. Was disappointed to have misread that one.
AlastairAbas