the apocalypse has arrived in the form of anna niciole smith coverage!!

what am i missing here about the significance of anna nicole smith's death? i mean, she was insignificant in life. this era's marilyn monroe? to whom?

no talent, trailer-park morons are a dime a dozen. she wasn't an actress of any note. she married a rich old guy. wtf?

she's topic "a" of how civilization has deteriorated. a creation of "entertainment tonight" and all the dreadful shows of its ilk. the "people" magazines and all the rags of its ilk. the cnn's, msnbc's and other cable networks of their ilk.

AARRGGHH!!

anyone in their right mind disagree?

 

Re: the apocalypse has arrived!!

That's a lot of ilk.

 

Re: the apocalypse has arrived!!

Shockey -- 24-hour cable news cycle gets some blame here too. Lotta time to fill. Low budget. Don't want to pay for any actual reporting when you get the same 0.7 rating whether you have her bloated face on TV or a something of actual merit.

 

Re: the apocalypse has arrived!!

Agreed, but on a different angle.

If CNN, the Enquirer and ET had existed in the 50s, Marilyn Monroe would not nearly have been as glamorized as she was in the newsreels of the day.

 

Re: the apocalypse has arrived!!

how do you figure that? she was a real movie star who was married to a huge baseball hero and renowned playwright. you're waaaaay off here.

she'd be angelina jolie. anna nicole? wtf??

 

Re: the apocalypse has arrived!!

I think he means that a 50s celebrity's dirty laundry would have never stayed private if CNN, Enquirer, etc. had existed back then.

 

Re: the apocalypse has arrived!!

Angelina Jolie, conversely, is no Marilyn Monroe.

Anna Nicole's nuttiness in the 50s would've been hidden from public view. So chances are she would've been Marilyn-like. That's what I'm saying. It's the times.

 

um, she woulda been a marilyn wannabe. the '50s were littered with those.

 

If you're in the media, why are you asking the question?

Edit: Same reason there are three separate threads on her here, I guess.

 

that's my point. i've been in the media for almost 30 years, and i just don't get it. guess i AM a dinosaur.

 

Shockey, I'm probably older than anyone here (except Spinited) and I just think it's just the insatiable appetite for salacious gossip.

I don't think it was any different--cf the Richard Burton/Liz Taylor affair back in the 60's. It's just that it never lets up now. The competition for eyeballs is more fierce than every before.

Here's a sports comparable.

Thirty years ago, there were probably three print guys who showed up to Leafs practices if there was a story breaking. Now, it's four papers, 1/2 dozen radio stations, the three canadian sports channels and assorted hangers-on.

No one wants to be left out of the party and no one wants go go back to their office holding nothing but their dick in their hands.

 

jr, my prehistoric brother -- i understand today's insatiable hunger for gossip. i get why brangelina and tomkat, etc., draw so much attention. agreed.

guess my issue goes back to this: i know why folks "gossip" or are intrigued by legit celebrities. always have been.

but what in tarnation put anna nicole smith into the stratosphere of celebrity to be worth all the buzz? seriously, i'm confounded by this. can anyone explain this phenomenon? she couldn't sing, wasn't a movie or tv star? wtf? i am absolutely stupefied on this one.