Charlie Sheen has been a negative publicity machine, generating headlines involving drug and alcohol abuse and charges of domestic abuse. Should the public support these people? Or should fans avoid buying any entertainment products from individuals who have acted abominably outside their careers?
Sheen is an interesting example. It may be that it's easier for fans to say they'll boycott entertainment produced by a bad-boy movie star than a television star because moviegoers must physically put down money to see a film. Also, his character is a playboy character — the reaction might be different if he were playing the wholesome father of small children on an ABC Family show. "(Sheen's) character on the show is more representative of his real-life persona than it is hypocritical of it," Kehoe said. Different celebrities and infractions, of course, receive different treatment by the public.
“There are so many variables,” noted Mary Elizabeth Williams of Salon.com. Richards became a household name playing Kramer on “Seinfeld.” “Nobody really cares if Michael Richards makes a comeback or not,” Williams said, pointing out that Richards’ star seemed to have already faded anyway before the incident.
“A lot of people were turned off by Tom Cruise and his Scientology stuff, and the couch jumping on ‘Oprah,’” Geier said. “If you put out a good product, people will want to see it. If you make a good record, or movie, people tend to ignore the bad things you did.”
In a culture dominated by the 24-hour news cycle, the public’s attention span is short, and generally speaking, so is the amount of time that people hold grudges against stars.
“There are probably some Mel Gibson movies people will watch 100 years from now.
No comments:
Post a Comment