Quantcast

PUBLIC OPINION > Alec Baldwin's Paparazzi Beatdown Was Justified

SodaHead Celebs 2012/06/22 16:00:00
Maybe "beatdown" is a little harsh, but there's photographic evidence that "30 Rock" star Alec Baldwin got physical with a paparazzo on his way out of the NYC Marriage License Bureau. The photographer says Baldwin rushed at him like a bull, unprovoked, and punched him square in the chin. Baldwin hasn't said much on the matter, except that #allpaparazzishouldbewaterboarded. His words. We asked the public if the "beatdown" was justified.

baldwin paparazzi

It looks like Baldwin doesn't have to explain himself -- the public is already on his side. Though supporters didn't seem to care much about what actually happened. They were just happy to see the paparazzi get what was coming. Even by the photographer's account, at worst it was an unprovoked punch. But with the paparazzi, "unprovoked" is a loose term. One commenter wrote, "When you are asked to back off and stop, and refuse, then you become offensive to people, and celebrities are people who deserve a little bit of privacy."

Older Voters Aren't Amused

For younger voters, particularly those under the age of 45, the event was actually a little bit humorous. No one really likes the paparazzi, so it seems like fair game for a nice laugh. But older voters took the matter more seriously. They were more likely to suggest that celebrities choose that type of life when they promote themselves. That doesn't justify an assault.

Girls Get Rowdy

We were surprised to find that female voters were actually more likely to say Baldwin's attack was justified. We expected men to be more gung-ho with the violent reaction. Plus, the tabloids paparazzi shoot for are usually marketed to women. But girls know a good story when they see one, and they're not going to let social graces get in the way of a little street justice.

The Well-Off Wave a Finger

Income had an unexpected impact on how respondents voted. Even though Baldwin is clearly the wealthier party here, lower income voters tended to side with him against the paparazzi. Maybe it's his satirical CEO character, Jack Donaghy from "30 Rock," that won them over. Higher income voters were much more likely to side with the photographer, though the sample size was a little rough.

If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about Baldwin's beatdown. We'd love to hear from you!
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • ruru 2012/08/05 22:40:17
    ruru
    The paparazzi should get a real job and quit being anoying little pests. Once a request has been made by a celebrity to back of, the paparazzi should have to stay back a distance of at least 60 feet. The celebrities have a right to a personal life.
  • Tastentier 2012/07/29 00:34:34
    Tastentier
    I can understand his reaction, but that doesn't make it right. The paparazzo's actions were legal, whereas Baldwin committed assault with bodily injury. That's indefensible, imho.
  • Nika 2012/07/20 18:40:59
    Nika
    +1
    Paparazzi are allowed to do so many things normal people couldn't. They are professional stalkers. I think that should be illegal. Photograph them at public events, that's fine, but don't follow them home trying to get the weirdest shot.
  • malikasecrets 2012/07/18 19:28:16
    malikasecrets
    +3
    Baldwin has made a choice to put himself in the public's eye. I can see where he could have been stressed over his limit with cameras following him around. Maybe Baldwin should get some anger management therapy to learn how to deal with someone getting into his space. Being an obnoxious photographer is getting into his space which does get him free publicity. Baldwin hopefully would choice to be on his best behavior or get out of his job.
  • Old Soldier 2012/07/13 17:16:33
    Old Soldier
    Well, let's really look at this in the true light. The Supreme Court states that a woman has the sole rights over her own body and has the right to kill an unwanted Child. Now it appears that people can't decide if a person has the rights over their own body where photographs are concerned. Now, does this mean a person has the right to kill for the sake of their body, but cannot protect their rights as to who they allow to take a picture of their body? Sounds a little uneven to me. Also, it should be considered that if someone takes my image and prints it, it is a fact that the person in the picture has the copy rights to its use. Just ask Wikipedia if you don't believe me. According to the people of the Wiki, they cannot display a picture of a person without that person's permission. I learned this when pooking for a picture of Jan-Michael Vincent.

    Now, I have Movies of Vincent, and the program to capture and print a picture from the movie. However, if I should post a picture of vincent on Facebook, for instance, I would be open to a lawsuit at Vincent's pleasure upon its discovery.
  • MCA 2012/07/07 21:13:09
    MCA
    +1
    Paparazzi are the scum of society! That's my personal opinion. But, they wouldn't have a job if society would stop reading the mags and rags they sell their pictures to. Society wouldn't care if they stopped putting celebs on a pedestal so high that it takes sneaky paparazzi to feed their lust for any and all information on celebs.

    Just because Alec Baldwin has a career as an actor doesn't mean everyone has the right to know what he does off camera or that we are entitled to have a camera in his face 24/7/365. Would you like someone impeding your path to take photos of you? If someone were to be taking photos of you and you asked them to stop, would you be justified in stopping in them? Would you allow someone to take pictures of you, your kids, in your own backyard? We can't look at celebs as having no life of their own if we expect to have our own private life. They are people too and deserve the same respect and privacy that we expect for ourselves.

    The best way to stop paparazzi is to stop buying the junk the sell and support the privacy of all citizens, regardless who they are. Let the celebs determine how much of their life they will share rather than having peeping toms slithering and sneaking around deciding for them. Let the celeb decide if they will tell you who they had dinner with. If they don't want to say, then it's none of your business.
  • ruru MCA 2012/08/05 22:42:26
    ruru
    Excellent answer.
  • MCA ruru 2012/08/07 17:21:23
    MCA
    +1
    Thank you Ruru!
  • Tony Cicarella 2012/06/30 12:55:40
    Tony Cicarella
    +2
    If any one deserves a beats own it's that smug arrogant Alex Baldwin. He's nothing but a talentless punk.
  • bob h. Tony Ci... 2012/07/12 19:21:40
    bob h.
    +1
    That's just what I was thinking. He should be happy someone took his picture.
  • KAREN J... Tony Ci... 2012/07/18 00:38:40
    KAREN JAMES
    +1
    I can't totally disagree with you but he is also a human being who should be allowed a walk street in peace.
  • Tony Ci... KAREN J... 2012/07/19 03:26:10
    Tony Cicarella
    +1
    I agree to a degree, but when u chose to be a public figure, for which u become very rich like this jerk, then u can't expect total privacy.
  • MCA Tony Ci... 2012/08/07 18:01:01
    MCA
    Why not Tony? Where does it say if you become an actor, you lose all rights to privacy? Whether we like someone or not shouldn't make a difference as to what rights they have.
    I'm not a fan of his, but his paycheck and awards says a lot of people are fans. He simply does a job, acting. That doesn't make him a public figure. His fans make that decision based on their own lust for more information.
    Fred Gwynne was a lot more popular than people realize. He was much more than tall Herman Munster. Gwynne sang professionally, acted in TV shows, acted in movies, acted on Broadway from plays by Shakespeare to modern era playrights, painted, sculpted, and wrote & illustrated children's books which were all published. And yet this man managed to keep his work and home life separate. I imagine it was difficult considering his towering 6'5" frame and very recognizable face. Would he be able to get away with it today? Probably not thanks to paparazzi who trespass and invade the privacy of anyone they feel like. Frankly, I would have loved to have seen the paparazzis face as 'Frankenstein' came flying out of the bushes at them! Now THAT I would have paid for! hahaha
  • Tony Ci... MCA 2012/08/08 22:25:01
    Tony Cicarella
    Yawn, do I really need to waste my time debating this? Nah!
  • MCA Tony Ci... 2012/08/12 21:33:53
    MCA
    If you don't want to debate it, that's fine. But you don't need to be rude about it.
  • Tony Ci... MCA 2012/08/17 00:50:32
    Tony Cicarella
    If u thought that was rude u r way too thin skinned for sodahead. Half the fun is being rude. It's just an outlet for ways most of us would never act out in public. Toughen up. Pretend ur a tough guy like Alec Baldwin thinks he is.
  • MCA Tony Ci... 2012/08/18 18:12:31
    MCA
    I'm not too thinned skin and I don't have to pretend. I simply made a comment, reminding you of the manners you were most likely taught. Just because we aren't face to face doesn't mean you should act any differently than if we were in public. It's a sad state of affairs when people think its fun to be rude when it accomplishes nothing. Thats just plain chilldish. I tend to avoid the kids on here and only engage with what i believe to be adults. Occassionally I'm wrong.
  • Tony Ci... MCA 2012/08/18 19:59:55
    Tony Cicarella
    Wah wah, if I want to be scolded for manners I'll go home to mommy. If u don't like mine then don't respond to my posts. Personally I can stand self righteous asses like ur self but I play along until they bore the hell out of me. Ur pretty much at that point so later. Alligator
  • MCA Tony Ci... 2012/08/20 10:09:21
    MCA
    Hey, if you're too thinned skin....

    You have a little problem with reading don't you? No where was I whining, so I guess you're just crying cause you were caught being a spoiled brat. Run home to mommy and learn how to act in public. I'm amazed you can even find a web site twice.
  • Tony Ci... MCA 2012/08/20 23:21:34
    Tony Cicarella
    ROFL, good one!
  • wilsonmja 2012/06/26 05:46:34
    wilsonmja
    +1
    So it's ok to assault somebody as long as they are universally disliked. Nice. Just wait, Alec, you'll be begging for them when nobody cares about you anymore.
  • Ann 2012/06/25 21:29:50
    Ann
    +1
    Not justified. His life is not private, nor should it be. If he was starting out he would be nicer.
  • brownchr947 2012/06/25 20:52:24
    brownchr947
    +1
    It's despicable that celebrities think that they're about the law. Just look at the Brittney Spears incident.
  • none 2012/06/25 18:47:48
    none
    The get what they deserve, they're bottom feeders.
  • wilsonmja none 2012/06/26 05:48:44
    wilsonmja
    They're not taking pictures for their personal collection. They are taking them because magazine publications pay top dollar for some of them. Why is that? Because millions of people buy these magazines because they need to know the latest gossip. So, who are the bottom feeders?
  • none wilsonmja 2012/06/26 17:28:45
    none
    Still the paparazzi I'm afraid. People with no life that follow the lives of celebrities don't help things but it always comes back to the over bearing pushy paparazzi.
  • wilsonmja none 2012/06/26 17:44:44
    wilsonmja
    +1
    No, paparazzi is a symptom of the problem. The problem is that people care WAY too much about what goes on in the lives of celebrities. If you don't like paparazzi, stop watching Entertainment Tonight, stop buying tabloids and stop caring about who Brad Pitt is marrying or what sexual orientation Tom Cruise is. There is a demand for paparazzi or they wouldn't exist. The bottom feeders are those who care what goes on with celebrities in their personal lives.
  • none wilsonmja 2012/06/26 18:03:15
    none
    I don't watch, read, or listen to any of that complete foolishness because I have my own life and don't need to live vicariously. Paparazzi still get what the deserve.
  • wilsonmja none 2012/06/26 22:39:27
    wilsonmja
    And I would say that when you make millions of dollars because of your notariety, you get what you deserve for assaulting people who put your face in magazines.
  • none wilsonmja 2012/06/27 00:05:09
    none
    Bruised knuckles.
  • Tastentier wilsonmja 2012/07/29 00:44:49
    Tastentier
    I agree 100%. The real problem is that we worship these people like demigods, even though they haven't done anything to advance mankind.

    How many people know who Norman Ernest Borlaug was? He saved more than a billion people from starvation, and yet he rarely ever made the news. Not even when he died about 3 years ago. But everybody knows completely irrelevant people like Alec Baldwin, Charlie Sheen and Octomom. There is something deeply wrong with our priorities.
  • wilsonmja Tastentier 2012/07/29 02:15:01
    wilsonmja
    Very true.
  • simplex5 2012/06/25 16:13:58
    simplex5
    When is enough , enough...What happen to privacy? it just seems like everything thing you do is being watched. Transparences is more and more each day..No more privacy it seems..
  • Quinni 2012/06/25 15:22:31 (edited)
    Quinni
    ok, If someone was in my face and following me all day long, invading my personal space and life, just for some gossip to print, I'd give him a "beatdown" too. Seriously, Actors and Actresses are HUMAN... they are people too... some with not so normal lives, but hey, normal is over rated. Their privacy should be respected just as each one of us asks ours to be. Secondly, seriously, if gossip and hearsay about "stars" really gets you excited, then you need a life. People need to pay attention to their own lives and not get so caught up in others. True, Alec is way over the top, has a mouth on him, and gets overly irritated.... has a short fuse... but we all know these "reporters" reputations and how they work.
  • ruru Quinni 2012/08/05 22:44:27
    ruru
    Well said.
  • Ashley 2012/06/25 12:50:51
    Ashley
    I am not in favor of this type of press stalking and harrassing people. It does not justify Alec Baldwin's actions.
  • Resp 2012/06/25 03:33:30
    Resp
    +1
    It is legal to photograph on public property especially news. Alex should get arrested for his assault.
  • ChrisK1969 Resp 2012/06/25 12:22:44
  • Quinni Resp 2012/06/25 15:33:09 (edited)
    Quinni
    +1
    True, I can take a picture of a statue in the town square. Although, publishing a photo of a stranger and/or their kid at the park without personal permission could cause some damage... The photographers that follow these people around all day DO NOT have their permission to do so. They don't have permission to speculate or create rumors either. That falls under deformation of character, stalker, pepping tom, and others. And, I would hardly classify them in the "News" category.
  • bob h. Quinni 2012/07/12 19:33:08
    bob h.
    Either you "Actively pursue public recognition" or you don't.

Entertainment

2013/05/18 10:00:49

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals