I have a media question to anyone who's been around from the 50's, 60's, 70's etc. I'm in my 30's and i'd like to know what was the paparazzi like in that era compared to today were they as crazy and running around that much as we see them right now.

Every action begets an equal and opposite reaction...There was no action in the 50's and so no reaction...action picked up in the 60's and the beginnings of reaction, by both the authorities and the Press...As TV coverage increased in the 70's, 80's and 90's, the paparazzi took more and more advantage of this three-ring circus...Probably the passive nature of TV entertainment reinforced this trend. Perhaps the growth of the internet
will slow down this trend as we move into the 21st century and push us toward more participatory democracy and
more creativity in more self-dirrected career activity...

only on the extreme biggest people

Jackie O-who really only had Ron Gallella after her
Marilyn had cameras around her
Grace Kelly

it wasn't like this for regular people at all
and Presidents even did not have the coverage, they used to actually be able to walk in public with little fanfare before JFK
and ex-Presidents usually went about their merry way
Nixon for the most part only had a couple of security and he travelled freely

There was alot of cameras at major events for celebs (Oscars, etc.) but actors had space
it wasn't 24-7-365
and there was no cable

and except for official events, in USA at any rate, no major 24-7 car chases back then
except for official events

Cannes film festival always was an exception

My guess is that since film was more expensive, photo journalists were more selective about what they would shoot and how often they would shoot it. If we had digital photography back then, it would have been just as crazy as it is now.

The increasing portability and ease at which the cameras can be hid is a contributing factor as well.

the celeb photographers were also under threat of the studios
the studios protected their stars and deals were made for exclusive shots at a different time than in compromising positions
and of course, things were hushed up and not talked about and everyone was ok with that

today what happened with RFK and JFK and Marilyn wouldn't be possible
(or Eisnehower who had an affair, or any of the others)

Times haven't changed much. People were just as unscrupulous then as they are now. The only thing that's changed is the medium and it's accessibility. Now anyone can do with a cell phone and internet access in minutes what took well-funded organizations hours or days to do just a few decades ago.

Liberace sued anyone who made allegations
Rock Hudson's people did the same
silence was insured (and I am sure there was threats of physical violence to the photogs)

and the real press wouldn't publish or it could get canned if you did...

studios owned the media too

Raymond Burr(sad to say) had to invent an entire fiction of a life, including phony child that died in childbirth that wasn't revealed until after he died
that he was gay and it was all phony

Almost impossible except for a star that is willing to spend millions to cover their life up

Now, you have 100s out there at same time, as opposed to one or two, and each covers each others back- so if someone throws a punch, there is now
a record of it

It's like criminals now- America's most wanted has been successful in catching 1000s of criminals and people now see pictures of them and they are caught. There was no nationwide network back then.

Thanks guys you've been very helpful.

I agree with your overview, bill -- whereas decades ago there was always plenty of time to sweep scuttlebutt under the rug, word on the "scandal of the hour" is delivered instantaneously today.

TMZ pays people to attempt to get stars angry (or not even stars)

they want to make stars mad, then they put it on their website

however- nowadays, the Enquirer is one of the few last places where actual investigative work is done, and almost always, now, the former "rag"
is 100% correct.
Without the Enquirer, we would never have known what a s&umbag John Edwards and his wife really were. So that is a good thing.

bad though is having Drudge up 20hours a day...though the vast majority of stories Drudge writes are true, just slanted