|
Our policy at Dot
Net is that we look for the positive. We enjoy
interviewing our visitors' favorite actors, celebrities and
entertainers and telling something about them that they might not
know; we like bringing "regular people" a bit into their lives and letting
you see things from their point of view.
We believe strongly
in mutual respect. Entertainers need their fans for their
livelihoods. Fans need their entertainers for whatever reason: sheer
enjoyment, feeling like you're walking in someone else's shoes or life - it's
usually mutually beneficient. What you have seen in our interviews is
pretty much a smidgen of what most of our actors, entertainers and
celebs say. We freely edit when someone says something that they
didn't mean to; exposes a bit too much for their comfort level, or simply asks
us not to include something. We believe it makes for a better interview
actually. We have a trust level with our subjects that allows them to
relax, to speak freely and to actually enjoy telling us about a portion of their
personal or professional lives. Being family friendly, we really don't
want to do an exposé - we readily admit that we're not the National Enquirer or
another tabloid. There are certain lines that we deliberately choose not
to cross.
Life happens and
sometimes it sucks. In the past several months, actually over the past few
years, we've seen entertainers and celebrities implode in their real lives,
making questionable choices, doing questionable or downright stupid
things. We choose not to dwell on these. If an person of interest
does something; a crime for example; that we feel is inappropriate - we just
won't interview them or promote them. End of story. If a "POI" has
something occur to them; beyond their scope of control; again, we make a
judgement call. We might (and usually do) present the official account,
but we're not going to intrude into their lives.
We at Dot Net are
officially protesting the paparazzi who go beyond what is reasonable and
appropriate to intrude into people's lives; people such as Britney Spears and
as daytime's latest example, Nathaniel Marston. Did they
cause their own problems - yep; they're accountable for their actions -
absolutely. But hounding a person into a traffic accident because there is
no way on the face of the planet that she can avoid NOT bumping into you when
you're inches from her car window, or intruding into a hospital room to take
photos of an unconscious, vulnerable person is absolutely inappropriate and
should be met with the harshest of legal penalties.
It comes down to
what is morally right - not what makes the fastest buck or gets the most hits to
your website or tabloid. There are lines that SHOULD be drawn.
Hopefully we're not the only ones choosing to draw them
here.
Valarie
Beadle
Editor,
Publisher
Dot Net -
DaytimeTV.net, EntertainmentWatch.net, PrimetimeTV.net,
LatenightTV.net
|
