Kristen Stewart Robert Pattinson misled with director Rupert Sanders. The sitcom continues: Pattinson would have left the marital home and he wanted a face to face with Rupert Sanders . Why Kristen Stewart has had to speak publicly on the subject? Would he have been the same in France?Responses Christophe Carron, associate editor of "Here". Swinging pictures of Kristen Stewart currently playing around with Rupert Sanders, " Us Weekly "has managed what remains, for now, one of the best journalistic coups of the summer of 2012 people in the United States. The characters involved (Kristen Stewart and Rob Patz) are at the zenith of their fifteen minutes of fame, the scenario (a young actress with the director much older, married with family) is a classic dramas and, not to spoil, there is material, a beautiful series of pictures showing the truth about of "Us". Ah the photos (which only a part was published) ... It is their presence that prompted Kristen Stewart to immediately admit his relationship with Rupert Sanders. Without them, and despite the reputation of seriousness of "Us Weekly", the actress and the director of "Snow White and the hunter" could deny this little infidelity. The wall, Kristen had to split to a statement expressing his regret at having deceived Robert and publicly apologize.
Torque, a marketing object
The most liberal-libertines can always argue that the actress does what she wants from her loves and you do not have to judge his choice in the matter. They will of course because it is no longer time under leagues. If Stewart had to express themselves, it is because his marriage is a marketing object integral to the promotion of the saga "Twilight". The film series is based on the love story of Bella and Edward, extended story in real life by the Stewart-Pattinson love affair. RobPatz deceive, it is also deceiving his audience, to whom it sells to its length interviews sentimental treacle. There was a gap between what the actress publicly demonstrates, this image built as his career and his private life. Kristen Stewart and would not have staged his public life, she would have had no apology to make and could have mistaken that she wants when she wants, without having to apologize if she got shoot by a photographer ...
In France, a different situation
The same thing could it happen in France? An example: a top athlete, adored by the whole country, present in numerous commercials, herald of values such as loyalty, righteousness, honor, respect, commitment ... would be taken by hand in the bag trying to deceive his wife, at random, a young actress. Imagine a magazine photograph them together and gets the headlines. This sport would he take the trouble to write a statement apologizing for not having respected the values they defend publicly (sometimes blow checks from generous sponsors)? Obviously not.Despite the obviousness of the situation and evidence by the image that could produce the newspaper, the only thing that athlete would prepare an assignment would be to attack the magazine in question violated his right to the image and private life. The newspaper, in full procedure would be silenced, as all the other titles that would not dare, the coup, to venture on this slippery slope. Everyone would be silent, the magazine behind the scoop align tens of thousands of dollars and the athlete in question would continue to quietly defend publicly against hard cash, the values it does not meet in private ...
The French model cons-productive for the stars
Two models of society ... Which is fairer? For everyone to see. But there is one thing that many forget: the French model is completely against-productive for the celebrities. Better public communication that want to hide the truth. An apology is not very pleasant at the time, but they have the merit of enabling the public to move on ( remember Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, Hugh Grant and Divine ...). The silence, however, merely fuels the worst of the worst rumors and fantasies.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment