Menu Menu
[gtranslate]

Where do we draw the line on celebrity coverage?

Exploiting vulnerable individuals is not entertainment. No matter how famous they are.ย 

Hayden Panettiere, known for her role inย Nashvilleย and more recently, for her public struggles with addiction, found herself the unwitting centre of attention this week, but not for reasons she โ€“ย or anyone with a functioning moral compass โ€“ย cared for.

People Magazine published a video interview with the actress that quickly drew backlash from viewers, many of whom expressed concerns that Panettiere appeared unwell, her speech slurred, her answers uncomfortable.

On social media, an outcry followed calling for the interview to be taken down. It was labelled exploitative and inappropriate given her recent struggles, which include the loss of her younger brother earlier this year.

The video and subsequent response have highlighted the mediaโ€™s ongoing fascination with vulnerable celebrities, and the dangerous trend of exploiting their struggles for entertainment.

People Magazineโ€™s interview comes as singer Chappell Roan has started conversations around celebrity boundaries. The singer called outย โ€˜entitledโ€™ย fans on her TikTok account last month, before telling a photographer to โ€˜shut the f*** upโ€™ on the VMAs red carpet.

Her behaviour has triggered a wave of discussion around the way we treat people in the spotlight, often assuming we have the right to interrogate their personal space because they have a public presence.

Panettiereโ€™s interview has spotlighted what can happen when calls like Roanโ€™s arenโ€™t listened to.

The actress was asking deeply personal and distressing questions on camera, and her demeanour seemed uncomfortable throughout.

Comment
byu/galaxystars1 from discussion
inDListedCommunity

Both People and Panettiereโ€™s representatives have since denied that she has relapsed, but that isnโ€™t really the point.

Whether or not Panettiere felt comfortable during the conversation, those publishing the content had a duty of care and should have recognised that her behaviour would be taken the wrong way.

โ€˜Poor Hayden. Obviously not sober. Do better People,โ€™ one user commented under the post, echoing several remarks that called out the magazine across social media.

Tiktokย usersย have also demanded the publication take the video down.

@yourfinestpardon shared her concerns that regardless of Peopleโ€™s actions, it may already be โ€˜too lateโ€™ as clips of the interview would have spread across the internet.

โ€˜That did her so dirty [sic]โ€™, she said in a recent video. โ€˜That interview, and the contents of that interview are so devastating, but thatโ€™s not what anybodyโ€™s going to focus on. Everybody else is focusing on the wrong parts of that interview.โ€™

Panettiere is sharing deeply personal and intimate parts of her life throughout the conversation, including her grieving process after the death of her younger brother. But the response has only highlighted our insatiable demand to see successful people in vulnerable situations.

Thereโ€™s an entire genre of media that thrives on capturing these very public falls from grace. Think of Britney Spears shaving her head, Amanda Bynes spiralling on Twitter, or, most recently, Jonah Hillโ€™s therapy-speak text messages laid bare for public dissection.

The inherent tension here lies between public interest and individual well-being. Yes, celebrities โ€“ especially those with long careers like Panettiere โ€“ sign up for a level of scrutiny when they enter the spotlight. But does that mean they owe us their pain?

This is the real question facing not just People Magazine, but the entire media landscape. When does it stop being news and start becoming exploitation?

Letโ€™s not pretend that the media machine doesnโ€™t know exactly what itโ€™s doing. When you watch Panettiereโ€™s interview, thereโ€™s a discomfort that feels all too deliberate. The magazine, which is hardly known for hard-hitting investigative journalism, saw fit to push forward with highly personal questions โ€“ย questions that left Panettiere visibly distressed.

Itโ€™s tempting to brush off criticism of outlets like People Magazine as part of the job. After all, celebrities are rich, famous, and live lives that most of us can only dream about.

But when public figures are visibly struggling, at what point does the relentless digging for drama become a new kind of trauma? Worse still, it reinforces the idea that personal battlesย  โ€“ย addiction, mental health, grief โ€“ย are somehow fair game for public consumption.

This isnโ€™t just about celebrities, though. Itโ€™s about how we, as a society, handle vulnerability. In a world where everything is content and nothing is sacred, the boundaries we grant to public figures are eroding.

More than ever, we seem willing to sideline compassion in the name of entertainment. And theย  media is constantly using this to their own advantage.

Weโ€™re not entitled to the most private corners of a celebrityโ€™s life just because they once courted fame. We, as the audience, have a duty of care โ€“ however distant โ€“ to know when enough is enough.

In the case of Panettiere, the answer seems obvious. Maybe, for once, itโ€™s time we all learned to look away.

Accessibility