Celebrities’ less-than-stellar practices scored
At first blush, the recent TV feature on the smiling celebrity sharing her birthday celebration with patients in a hospital looked for all the world like the very soul and emblem of enlightened charity. A little later, however, some viewers pondered on the other factors possibly pertinent to the feature on “inspiring” stellar charity:
How much did the generous star spend on the meal for around 100 people? Perhaps around P30, 000? It was next observed that the event was covered by several TV, radio and print outfits—so, how much did the star gain in terms of publicity mileage and a decided boost to her image as a caring celebrity? —Why, much more than that!
Is that too cynical a view to take on this and some other instances of stellar charity? We think not. The entertainment world is ruled by the “exchange deal” syndrome, which means that some stars and starlets operate on a quid pro quo basis, the governing principle of which is, “What’s in it for me?”
In the case of the charitable “birthday girl” featured on TV and in print coverage of her charitable event, the answer is clear: She got a lot more than the modest amount she spent.
Dubious motives
Now, we aren’t saying that all charitable stars have dubious motives. It’s just that some people’s perception of the situation is tainted by its cost-advantage ramifications. —Which is why we propose this guiding principle for genuinely charitable stars: If you spend less than P300,000 on your “sharing and caring” event, don’t invite the media to cover it. That way, it’s personal and pure, and can’t be misinterpreted to be motivated by publicity or image-boosting considerations. Fair enough?
Other dubious celebrity practices include some stars and starlets’ penchant for further boosting their careers by going as far as inventing controversies and feuds with other luminaries to get into gossip columns and tabloids (even negative publicity is OK—as long as they spell your name right)!
That’s why we read about this starlet allegedly making a big star feel insecure, or a star ostensibly fretting that another starlet will steal her husband away from her!
Publicity
Starlets also pick fights with each other (some of them mutually concocted and agreed upon) to generate publicity for themselves.
Even more cynically, they pay hacks to “react” in print to the concocted feud, and thus further fan the flames of conflict and promotions for as long as the gullible public allows them to get away with it—!
Related to this is the irritating bent of some stars to create a lot of fuss and bother about themselves, when their studio contracts are about to expire. They invent stories about “offers” from other networks, to pressure their home studios into renewing their contracts—at a higher fee!
Immediately after this happens, however, all talk about the “issue” stops—since the manipulative stars have cynically and cunningly gotten what they wanted!
