Yes Russell...there are bootleggers at the movies too...

@athenaascot how is it possible? It hasn’t been released on DVD yet, must be an illegal pirated copy. Russell Crowe on Twitter 13 April 2014

When fans tweet celebrities like Russell Crowe on social media like Twitter they can never be sure of how it will be received not only by them but their fans as well. Russell Crowe now has over a million and a quarter followers so fans should be careful of what they write. Time and time again I have seen the most innocent tweets feel the wrath of Russell Crowe on a bad day. This time it is an innocent picture amongst a collection on DVDs in an Italian bookshop that has been perceived as an illegal DVD of one of his movies. From the photo it is difficult to tell whether it is a poster or a DVD box containing an illegal copy of his latest movie Noah. The fan is devastated and been supported by other fans. So devastated she is thinking about leaving the Russell Crowe village.

The tweet raises some interesting points about people’s perceptions of what is an illegal video and what is acceptable and unacceptable piracy including dare I say Russell Crowe. Many people don’t really understand the concept of what is an illegal or pirate video. Fans were quick to jump on Twitter calling for other fans not to watch an illegal copy of Noah, but had no qualms about watching bootlegged videos either those recorded live at a concert and those copied from other professionally made videos. They are regularly retweeted by Russell Crowe fans. There is a perception because a video is on YouTube they are somehow legal videos. A large percentage of them are not.

The fan should take heart. Russell Crowe is not immune from watching and circulating a bit of piracy in the form of bootlegged concert videos or copies of officially made videos. He has circulated pirated copies of content he has copyright to, for example TOFG official videos but also other illegally copied professionally made videos and bootlegs of other musicians, artists and creators. (Although one cannot argue about the benefits of a bit of publicity for anyone whose work is retweeted by Russell Crowe, pirated or not). To me it makes no difference as to whether the piracy is a video or a movie. Movie piracy remains a significant problem.

Approximately a year and half ago I wrote a post about bootleggers in the movies after Russell Crowe had retweeted some illegal bootlegged videos by @lyndahere. (In the last four months @lyndahere’s bootlegging at concerts has since been acknowledged by Russell Crowe, the members of Great Big Sea and Alan Doyle. However, the extent of her bootlegging and music piracy has not has not been determined).

Wednesday, 26 December 2012

@lyndahere Yes Russell Crowe there are bootleggers at the movies (apology

….On your @russellcrowe Twitter site you have retweeted and provided a link to a live recorded concert by @lyndahere. @lyndahere is a full time bootlegger and music pirate known to you and your friends. She operates without a licence to record live concerts or permission to reproduce copyrighted videos.

@russellcrowe Merry Christmas My Hand, My Heart, Russell Crowe and Scott Grimes Crowe Doyle NYC Indoor Garden Party 23 December 2012

@lyndahere MT @proguesofficial @russellcrowe will NOT be performing this song at The Progues’ show tomorrow night at the London 02. 19 December 2012

@russellcrowe @russellcrowe @youtube 26 December 2012

….Secondly, I am wondering why you think you and your friends need publicity gained through illegal means. I mean aren’t the legal ways and the activities of the paparazzi enough? Surely with the release of the film Les Miserables and the presence of superstars like Sting and Hugh Jackman at your concerts I am wondering why you think you need this illegal type of promotion?

Thirdly, I am wondering why you are promoting someone who doesn’t seem to have any understanding of the concept of a ticket. @lyndahere has this idea that she the consumer deserves more than what your offering for the price of the ticket to a concert or movie. On Twitter @lyndahere wrote “Les Mis time. Slipped into prior showing to catch the film’s end –sniffles and applause. Bodes well” @russellcrowe @alanthomasdoyle 26 December 2012. She always wants more than what you and your friends are offering for the price of a ticket whether it be live recordings of concerts or the screening of a movie.

Fourthly, I am wondering why you are promoting and encouraging illegal activities on your Twitter site. I hope you seriously don’t believe that members of the public believe bootlegging and piracy are victimless crimes. On Twitter @lyndahere wrote to @BevyJean72 “You’re very welcome Beverly, you and anyone who’s enjoyed the videos. I love sharing great shows and great music 21 December 2012. It is illegal under US and Canadian law to record and distribute live recordings of concerts without permission.

Live concerts are not the only activities bootlegged. Movies are also bootlegged as they are screened in a theatre. Research shows bootlegged movies were a phenomenal problem in New York city. That is a problem distinct from being pirated movies. “About half of all the bootlegged films recorded live in a theatre, duplicated thousands of times and sent around the globe originated in New York city according to the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America)” (as sited in ‘Cracking Down on Bootlegged Movies’ by David Caurso in 2009).

In an episode of the American comedy Seinfeld one of the characters Kramer becomes involved in video recording movies in theatres and distributing them on the street. He takes it upon himself to change the original presentation of the movie and in the process becomes a celebrity artist in his own right in that industry. A bootlegged video or cam movie is a video recording of a movie made by a moviegoer while sitting in the theatre. Bootleggers do it for a number of reasons to make copies, distribute it and make money, to make copies so that people who can’t see it can or don’t want to pay the price to see it.

In an article in the New York Times in 1997 titled ‘Bootlegged Videos Piracy with a Camcorder’ journalist Linda Lee investigates the activity of bootlegging movies in theatres, their distribution in New York city and their negative impact on the entertainment industry. The journalist investigated how video recorders were being smuggled into screenings of movies, copies made and released. “Using a $500 videocamera and a tripod and occasionally making use of theatre’s audio jacks a bootlegger can go to the movies and make a $1000 or more…he makes copies and sells them…and that’s tax free” said Bill Shannon, the head of Motion Picture Association of America’s New York anti-piracy office. These activities were thriving in America and in particular New York city. Some of the copies made and released were done by industry employees as well as members of the public however, regardless of who is bootlegging there remains a problem…“The growing sophistication of technology and the cachet of seeing something first are combining to intensify a persistent problem”. Not only seeing something first but missing out on seeing something altogether.

So I gather it would be alright then in your view if someone went into the Les Miserables movie premier, recorded it and put it up on Internet? People could then download and watch it for free. Universal Pictures and its shareholders who finance your creative endeavours do have something to say about these types of activities as they and other movie studios lose millions of dollars per year to piracy of all kinds. Or perhaps you don’t really care as you have your money and quite a lot of it. More money than you and your children will ever need in their live times.

Some people may ask with all the technology around for movie pirating is bootlegging movies in theatres still being done. In a 2009 article ‘Cracking Down on Bootlegged Movies’ the journalist discusses new laws being introduced in New York city to outlaw bootlegging in theatres. In New York it is illegal to film in a movie theatre and offenders can face a fine of $250. New York has been identified as the worst city for bootlegging and has some of the worst penalties for offenders. The Motion Picture Association of America and others have been pushing for tougher penalties. While there is debate on the Internet about bootlegged movies and whether they are still being made there is still an audience for them in particular for people wanting to watch rare or unusual movies will resort to obtaining a bootlegged movie.

While there may be not a consequence for people bootlegging, the person selling or watching it, with little chance of being traced, caught and prosecuted Linda Lee’s ‘Bootlegging Movies with a Camcorder’ finds there are huge threats to the entertainment industry who fund these projects for example financial loses. It is difficult to know how much bootlegging costs the movie industry but it is estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars every year. The article states “One problem is that blasé New Yorker’s tend to see bootlegging, like counterfeiting Rolex watches as, a victimless crime” which of course it is not. From my experience of social media I don’t think that attitude is exclusive to New York but in America in general. @lyndahere is definitely blasé about the impact of bootlegging and music piracy and has no conscience about what she does. Michael Murray in his article‘Why Pay for Anything?Movie Bootlegging and the Evolution of Media’ writes about the evolution of the media industry. He regularly purchases bootlegged (as distinct from pirated copies) of DVDs “I have to admit to feeling some excitement if the DVD I brought is going to be a dud or not…maybe you are going to beat the system or the system is going to beat you”.

I am wondering if you have thought about what you are saying to your followers by providing links to and retweeting @lyndahere’s videos on Twitter. It is of course up to you what you tweet and retweet but what are you saying to others in particular to children and teenagers about the laws created to protect creative artists and their work. Children and teenagers read your Twitter page. Your children and their friends read your Twitter page. Most people only make a small number of recordings at concerts for personal use and that is okay. However, @lyndahere records everything she attends with no regard for the quantity or quality and puts it on Youtube. And you and your friends are encouraging it. You are trivialising copyright, music piracy and bootlegging laws that protect creative endeavours of individuals and corporations.

What are you saying about the quality of goods people are listening too and peoples creative work being presented? In a tweet to @alanthomasdoyle @lyndahere writes “I thought the nose looked rather familiar. Distinctively Doyle – it’s why I didn’t crop it out of the frame” 20 December 2012. It seems okay to her to make adjustments to others creative work and present them to the public in the way she sees fit. Like live recordings of concerts, live recordings of movies capture a range of activities in the immediate environment for example people talking, eating popcorn and candy interfere with the quality of the sound. Like live recordings of concerts those skilled in editing can alter the original copy of the movie. Michael Murray in his article‘Why Pay for Anything?Movie Bootlegging and the Evolution of Media’ who purchases bootlegged DVDs as against pirated DVDs writes about the editing of bootlegged movies “The Craziesin which a theatre goer’s shoulder was visible at the bottom of the screen and the copy of Alice in Wonderland I brought curiously devoid of what I would call colour. (Personally I kind of like interpretations of the filmic experience, seeing them as a kind of mash-up or a piece of found if degraded, art’)…

@lyndahere is being encouraged and rewarded for committing illegal activities like bootlegging and music piracy. She is engaged in music piracy and illegally copying DVDs and making them available on her YouTube sites. It is difficult to know how much illegal activity she is involved in. She demonstrates little constraint when bootlegging then why would she show constraint when engaging in music or other types of piracy. Some of those people whose work is being pirated are friends of yours. I am wondering why you are promoting illegal activities on your sites when you have blocked people whose only “crime” is to say something you don’t agree with. They have remained blocked. Yet here is a person who breaks the laws and commits crimes like bootlegging and music piracy whose activities you and your friend @scottgrimes promote and reward.

“Regardless, the experience of attending a movie and seeing it in a theatre cannot be duplicated. To have everything dissolve around you and fade to black, and to see a world-so much larger than life-unfold before you just as the artists intended is unique. And without even knowing it, the mood and expectations of the rest of the crowd, like weather blowing in, passes through you and then a rare but unforgettable moment of shared transcendence might emerge, and for that, well for that we will always return” (Michael Murray in his article‘Why Pay for Anything?Movie Bootlegging and the Evolution of Media’). And that is why I enjoy paying for goods brought legally whether it be a concert, movie, CD or DVD. I enjoy the experiences offered to me as the artist intended.

References

Caruso, D. B 2009 ‘Cracking Down on Bootlegged Movies’ viewed 23 December 2012 at www.cbsnews.com

eHow Contributor ‘How to Bootleg a Movie’ viewed 23 December 2012 at http://www.ehow.com/

Lee, L 1997‘Bootlegged Videos Piracy with a Camcorder’ viewed 23 December 2012 at http://www.nytimes.com/

Murray, M ‘Why Pay for Anything?Movie Bootlegging and the Evolution of Media’ viewed on 27 December 2012 www.pajiba,com/think_pieces/why-pay

Rootstock concert reviews...

"One of Doyle’s new songs was a heartwrenching take on the 1917 sealing accident near Fogo Island, Newfoundland, in which a number of men found themselves trapped amongst the ice without escape. One etched the phrase, “April 11, lying down to die” on a piece of wood and sent it adrift as to give their families some form of closure. Doyle retold this story, providing background to the new song he wrote commemorating the event." Megan Rach, Music Vice (no copyright infringement intended)

While the fans contribute a range of photos and reviews of concerts on social media one of my favourite things is still researching and reading the professionals (both reviewers and photographers) and what they choose to share. They often offer fresh insights and a little bit extra for the fans who couldn't attend such as those below. These reviews and photographs are from the Alan Doyle Lindi Ortega and Steven Page concert at the Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre Centre, Toronto on the 29 March 2014.

The review and photos are by Meghan Rach and available at musicvice.com and some more photos in a slide show from Josh Moody below at aestheticmagazinetoronto.com. Many thanks. (no copyright infringement intended)

Rootstock at Elgin and Winter Garden, Toronto — Gig review and photos (no copyright infringement intended) by Megan Rach at musicvice.com published on 4 April 2014

Who: Alan Doyle, Lindi Ortega, Steven Page
When: Saturday, 29 March 2014
Where: Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre Centre, Toronto
In One Word: Nostalgic

Recreated from the intimate setting usually found at the Jackson-Triggs Niagara Estate Amphitheatre, the wine conglomerate hosted ROOTSTOCK, a songwriter’s circle featuring prominent Canadian artists such as Great Big Sea’s Alan Doyle, The Barenaked Ladies’ Steven Page, and former Torontonian, Lindi Ortega for this year’s Earth Day.

Doyle and Page dominated the pre-show banter, throwing out jokes and witticisms (Page even making a crack about running for Mayor of Toronto, a race that is now aliteral circus ).

Aside from the jests, each artist showcased new music and discussed other projects in the works in the coming days, briefly explaining their songs or telling a story to go with it.

Ortega’s performances were a clear indicator as to how she was on the bill between two esteemed Canadian artists. Ortega has a wildly beautiful, haunting voice with a graceful and natural vibrato dressed up with a subtle rasp to it. Attributing Johnny Cash as an inspiration to her country music, songs like “Tin Star” have a melancholic vibe to it. While the mastered version is lovely, it was her live performance of “Tin Star” that had the audience sold.

Page, after joking that after Doyle sang a new song he would have to as well, showcased a brand-new (and potentially unfinished) song. Providing the audience with warning beforehand, Page admittedly forgot some of the lyrics halfway through the song and instead used it as an opportunity to joke around and improvise.

One of Doyle’s new songs was a heartwrenching take on the 1917 sealing accident near Fogo Island, Newfoundland, in which a number of men found themselves trapped amongst the ice without escape. One etched the phrase, “April 11, lying down to die” on a piece of wood and sent it adrift as to give their families some form of closure. Doyle retold this story, providing background to the new song he wrote commemorating the event.

One of the major highlights of the evening was the Earth Hour aspect of the performance. Most of the lights were shut off, relying on as much of the candlelight as possible. Doyle, Page and Ortega unplugged their guitars and sang without the microphones, bringing the audience to near silence as the performance continued. Not to be outdone, Doyle put the guitar down and performed entirely a cappella.

The second half of the evening was a sort of “fan service”, as Doyle and Page busted out some of the old favourites. The first song back on, Page and Doyle performed The Barenaked Ladies’ tune, “Jane” together.

For me, personally, this was when it got a bit surreal. Page busted out another new song, and halfway through included an interlude about how he always wanted to write something that was “the soundtrack to someone’s first year in university”, or “the one song your grandma knows”. It hit me that for everyone that surrounded me, that’s exactly what he did.

Doyle singing Great Big Sea’s “Consequence Free”, or the two of them playing “Jane” was more than a special moment for everyone else there, they have very real memories they can attribute to when those songs came out. For most of the audience, those songs were the soundtrack to their first year in university.

Particularly when Page finished up his own set with “Brian Wilson”, I realized that I am the age that my mother was when that song was big. For many of the audience members, the evening was more than just a nice night of musical entertainment and wine tasting; it was a recreation of some old memories and pasts.

And in my own humble opinion, I think that’s what made the night a success.

Photos: ROOTSTOCK (Alan Doyle, Steven Page and Lindi Ortega) @ The Winter Garden Theatre Photos by Josh Moody (no copyright infringement intended) at aestheticmagazinetoronto.com

The Jackson-Triggs Niagara Estate Amphitheatre recreated its intimate ambiance for one-night-only at the Winter Garden Theatre in downtown Toronto last night, with a songwriter’s circle hosted by CBC Radio 2 Morning Host Tom Power, which featured the songs and voices of musicians Alan Doyle (Great Big Sea), Steven Page (Barenaked Ladies) and Lindi Ortega.
 













 
























 

Some ideas about fan labour…

With the developments on Twitter last week (Alan Doyle for the first time officially recognised and retweeted @lyndahere’s bootlegged videos of some of his new music.) I began to research and think about fan labour.

Many of the fans from the fandoms I am interested in are involved in investing their time and money in creating fan products. They include taking photographs, making videos at concerts, creating fan webpages, blogs, running social media fan sites and creating fan vids (for example for The Republic of Doyle).

Fan labour is the focus of a considerable amount of academic research. So what do those who study fandom say about fan labour? I was particularly interested in theories around the exchange of fan labour and money and the conflict between fan labour and copyright holders. Here are some of those ideas about fan labour (as distinct from fan service) I found interesting in a well referenced article from Wikipedia.

From Wikipedia as sited 5 April 2014 (no copyright infringement intended)

Fan labor is the productive creative activities engaged in by fans, primarily those of various media properties or musical groups^. These activities can include creation of written works (fictional, fan fictional and review literature), visual or computer-assisted art, music, or applied arts and costuming.

Although fans invest significant time creating their products, and fan-created products are "often crafted with production values as high as any in the official culture, most fans provide their creative works as amateurs, for others to enjoy without requiring or requesting monetary compensation. Fans respect their gift economy culture and are often also fearful that charging other fans for products of their creativity will somehow fundamentally change the fan-fan relationship, as well as attract unwanted legal attention from copyright holders. The skills that fans hone through their fan works may be marketable, and some fans find employment through their fan works.

In recent years, media conglomerates have become more aware of how fan labor activities can add to and affect the effectiveness of media product development, marketing, advertising, promotional activities, and distribution. They seek to harness fan activities for low-cost and effective advertisements (such as the 2007 Doritos Super Bowl Ad contest at the same time as they continue to send out cease and desist to the creators of amateur fan products—threatening legal action whose basis is increasingly being questioned by fandom rights groups like the Organization for Transformative Works which asserts the transformative and therefore legal nature of fan labor products…

Fan Products and Money

There is a divide in fandom between those who want to see new models of remuneration developed and those who feel that "getting paid cuts fandom off at the knees."

If there were legitimate pathways for fans to create products that could lead to fame and fortune (or at least a paying job), the tradeoff between getting paid and getting ahead in the community (cultural capital) might be enough of an incentive to encourage creative work by fans.

Fans who do their creative work out of paying respect to the original media property or an actor or to the fandom in general gain cultural capital in the fandom. However, those who attempt to sell their creative products will be shunned by other fans, and subject to possible legal action. Fans often classify other fans trying to sell their items for profit motives as “hucksters” rather than true fans.

Fans are often also fearful that charging other fans for products of their creativity, such as zines, videos, costumes, art, etc. will somehow fundamentally change the fan-fan relationship, as well as attract unwanted legal attention from copyright holders. That fear has come true in more than one case, such as the removal from sale on Amazon of a commercial fan fiction book set in the Star Wars universe.

However, some fans engage in for-profit exchange of their creations in what is known as the gray market. The gray market operates mainly through word of mouth and “under the table” sales, and provides products of varying quality. Even though these are commercial activities, it is still expected that fan vendors will not make a large amount of profit, charging just enough to cover expenses. Some vendors attempt to not mark up their products at all, and will use that information in their promotional information, in an attempt to secure the confidence of other fans who may look down at fans making a profit^.

Fan art exceptional in that artists have traditionally sold their works in public at conventions and other fan gatherings as well as on their own web sites. Many fan artists have set up e-commerce storefronts through vendors which allow customers to purchase items such as t-shirts, totes, and mugs with the fan design imprinted on them…

Fan works develop the skills of the artists, and fan works enable women to develop skills in encouraging environments that are traditionally male-dominated (such as website design or server maintenance). Only some fans, however, primarily in the computer game industries, find employment through their fan works.

Some companies purchase fan-created additions or game items. Other companies run marketplaces for fans to sell these items to other fans for monetary reward….

Legal issues

Most fan labor products are derivative works, in that they are creative additions or modifications to an existing copyrighted work or they are original creations which are inspired by a specific copyrighted work. Some or all of these works may fall into the legal category of transformative work (such as a parody of the original), which is protected as fair use under U.S. copyright law. However, corporations continue to ask fans to stop engaging with their products in creative ways.

Support for fans

Fan labor products may be protected by the Fair Use Doctrine of the U.S. Copyright Law, which judges if a work is copyright-infringing based on four tests:

·         the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

·         the nature of the copyrighted work;

·         the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

·         the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

However, these tests are not absolute, and judges may decide to weigh one factor more heavily than another in any given case.

Although some fan artists receive cease & desist letters or find themselves running afoul of copyright law, they may argue that their “artistic interpretation” of a character or scenario makes it a transformative work upheld by the fair use doctrine.

The Organization for Transformative Works is a fan-run organization that advocates for the transformative nature of fan fiction and provides legal advice for fan fiction writers, vidders, and other fan labor practitioners.

Chilling Effects is a joint web project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, University of Maine, George Washington School of Law, and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics, which covers the current state of copyright-related law suits, and has a special section devoted to fan fiction legal action and how to fight it.

Copyright holders fight fans

Recent years have seen increasing legal action from media conglomerates, who are actively protecting their intellectual property rights. Because of new technologies that make media easier to distribute and modify, fan labor activities are coming under greater scrutiny. Some fans are finding themselves the subjects of lawsuits or cease & desist letters which ask them to take down the offending materials from a website, or stop distributing or selling an item which the corporation believes violates their copyright. As a result of these actions by media companies, some conventions now ban fan art entirely from their art shows, even if not offered for sale, and third party vendors may remove offending designs from their websites.

Blogger Reflection...

One of the interesting things about writing a blog is looking at where I have been and where I am going. The statistics provided by Blogger are a great place to regularly reflect. Every day I am visited by statistic gathers and people who view what I have written from a range of countries, interested in a range of subjects. The statistics also show what blog posts they are reading. Usually people are viewing the most recent posts but occasionally they view posts from a long time ago. This week someone visited a post I wrote over a year ago about celebrity worship syndrome and the current research being done by academics on the subject.

After the events of last week on social media the big question I asked myself is do I still have the condition known as Celebrity Worship Syndrome?  I took the test offered on this previous post again. The answer is yes, I do enjoy talking and reading about my favourite celebrities and think about them more than I should. However, I really enjoy reading and talking about how other people enjoy and interact with their favourite celebrities even more. Would I do something illegal if a celebrity asked me to and would I spend my money doing it? Even, if I was acknowledged and elevated to the status of a big name fan on social media. The answer is still no. Not because of any ethics about doing something illegal or the psychological conditions attached through research, but the nature of fandoms and their relationships with celebrities. Fandoms created and controlled by celebrities on social media are constantly changing. Fans who spend their time and money on fan labour and who interact with celebrities only (rather than the fandom) on social media and achieve the status of big name fans can be here today and gone tomorrow and often without warning and without any explanation. There is always another fan ready and waiting to step up. 

@lyndahere and Celebrity Worship Syndrome 6 January 2013

An article in the UK Mail on Celebrity Worship Syndrome provided an overview of some research being done on the condition by psychologists at the University of Leicester. Celebrity Worship Syndrome is defined by Wikipedia as an “obsessive-addictive disorder in which a person becomes overly involved with the details of a celebrity's personal life. Psychologists have indicated that though many people obsess over glamorous film, television, sport and pop stars, the only common factor between them is that they are all figures in the public eye (i.e., celebrities)”.

The basis of the article was from the research conducted by Maltby et al (2003) in their article “A Clinical Interpretation of Attitudes and Behaviors Associated with Celebrity Worship”. They developed a scale and argue there are three levels of attitudes and behaviours associated with Celebrity Worship Syndrome, entertainment-social, intense personal and borderline pathological.

The study of around 700 people aged 18 to 60 found “ 22 per cent of our sample had the low-level form of Celebrity Worship Syndrome (entertainment-social), while 12 per cent showed signs of the moderate (intense personal) form which meant they had an intense personal type relationship with their idol. Around 2 per cent of people had the most serious form of the syndrome, meaning their celebrity worship was borderline pathological."(UK Mail).

Maltby et al (2004) provides an overview of the three levels in the article ‘Personality coping. A context for examining celebrity worship and mental heath’. “Low levels of celebrity worship have entertainment–social value and comprise attitudes and behaviours like ‘My friends and I like to discuss what my favourite celebrity has done’ and ‘Learning the life story of my favourite celebrity is a lot of fun’. This stage reflects social aspects to celebrity worship and is consistent with Stever’s (1991) observation that fans are attracted to a favourite celebrity because of their perceived ability to entertain and capture our attention”.

“Intermediate levels of celebrity worship, by contrast, are characterized by more intense–personal feelings, defined by items like ‘I consider my favourite celebrity to be my soul mate,’ and ‘I have frequent thoughts about my celebrity, even when I don’t want to’. This stage arguably reflects individuals’ intensive and compulsive feelings about the celebrity, akin to the obsessional tendencies of fans often referred to in the literature (Dietz et al., 1991; Giles, 2000)”.

“The most extreme expression of celebrity worship is labelled borderline–pathological, as exemplified by items like. ‘If someone gave me several thousand dollars (pounds) to do with as I please, I would consider spending it on a personal possession (like a napkin or paper plate) once used by my favourite celebrity’ and ‘If I were lucky enough to meet my favourite celebrity, and he/she asked me to do something illegal as a favour I would probably do it’. This factor is thought to reflect an individual’s social pathological attitudes and behaviours that are held as a result of worshiping a celebrity”.

The researchers in this piece conclude celebrity worship syndrome was not an uncommon behaviour. They argue like many attitudes and behaviours carried out in moderation should not be of concern. Celebrity worship for entertainment and social reasons was not related to any mental health problems. However, when carried out for intense personal reasons and the way they engage people may be at risk of severe mental health problems including stress, anxiety and depression. Celebrity worship is seen as a coping strategy and a way of disengaging with life.

“Therefore, it may be necessary to begin to speculate how it may be possible to intervene when celebrity worship takes on intense–personal characteristics to a point of concern. The present findings inform this issue. For example, those who engage in intense–personal forms of celebrity worship are characterized as tense, emotional and moody (neuroticism). They deal with stress by disengaging (both mentally and behavioural) and by living in a state of denial…As a result, individuals who demonstrate a worrying level of intense–personal celebrity worship and who suffer from mental health problems might be best helped by understanding and addressing their emotionality”.

So do you have CWS symptoms?

Say yes to the following and you may have low-level CWS:

• My friends and I like to discuss what my favourite celebrity has done.
• I enjoy watching my favourite celebrity.
• Learning the life story of my favourite celebrity is a lot of fun.

Agree with these more intense feelings and you may have a moderate case:

• I consider my favourite celebrity to be my soul mate.
• I have a special bond with my celebrity.
• I have frequent thoughts about my celebrity, even when I don't want to.

Agree with these and you may be obsessed, borderline pathological and suffering seriously from CWS:

• If someone gave me several thousand pounds to do with as I please, I would consider spending it on a personal possession, like a napkin or paper plate, once used by my favourite celebrity.
• If I were lucky enough to meet my favourite celebrity, and they asked me to do something illegal as a favour I would probably do it.
• I would be very upset if my favourite celebrity got married.

The UK Mail placed this quiz for celebrity watchers to decide whether they or their friends had ‘Celebrity Worship Syndrome’. From the questions asked I guess anyone who follows a celebrity on social media and responds to a post written by them or to other followers/friends has some type of low level Celebrity Worship Syndrome. A celebrity wouldn’t be a favourite if people didn’t know something about them, seen their work or enjoyed watching them do their work. This level of interest was not associated with any mental health issues according to the research.

What was interesting about this survey was the criteria offered by psychologists for the third level borderline pathological and suffering seriously from Celebrity Worship Syndrome and the statement ‘if I were lucky enough to meet my favourite celebrity and they asked me to do something illegal as a favour I would probably do it’. @Lyndahere did take it upon herself to do something illegal which was to make bootlegged videos of live concerts and engage in music piracy on YouTube.  She then distributed links via social media and has loaded them up onto other sites for distribution. The other statement that defines this type of condition “If someone gave me several thousand pounds to do with as I please, I would consider spending it on a personal possession, like a napkin or paper plate, once used by my favourite celebrity”. @lyndahere spends thousands of dollars on travel, accommodation and tickets to see Alan Doyle and Great Big Sea and every show creates bootlegged videos for people to view on YouTube and listen to on other sites.

References.

"Do you worship the celebs?Mail Online". Dailymail.co.uk. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-176598/Do-worship-celebs.html. Viewed 4 January 2013.

"Do you have Celebrity Worship Syndrome? Mail Online". Dailymail.co.uk. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-176674/Do-Celebrity-Worship-Syndrome.html. Viewed 4 January 2013.

Maltby, J., Houran, M.A., & McCutcheon, L.E. (2003). ‘A Clinical Interpretation of Attitudes and Behaviors Associated with Celebrity Worship’. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 191, 25-29.

Maltby, J., Day,L., McCutcheon,L.E., Gillett, R., Houran, J & Ashe, D.(2004). ‘Personality coping. A context for examining celebrity worship and mental health, British Journal of Psychology, 95, 411–428

Wikipedia Celebrity worship syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.mht. Viewed 4 January 2013.