February 21, 2008
-
Money For Celebrity Baby Photos
It is being reported on the Advertising Age web site that Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony will receive up to $6 million for photos of their baby twins.
Celebrities have been selling photos of their children. The thinking is that it will stop the demand for the paparazzi who are trying to snap a photo.
Christina Aguilera was paid $1.5 million for the photos of her son Max. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes released their baby photos for free. Here is the link: Link
I can understand releasing photos that you can control and drive down demand for the paparazzi. But getting $6 million to sell a photo of your child when your child is not old enough to give consent is a different story.
Do you think it is wrong to sell photos of your child if you are a celebrity?
Comments (98)
They are no different from most parents in that they want many people to see their children and say how cute they are. Money is not an issue for celebrities, it is all about feeding the need for attention.
Personally, I wouldn’t sell photos of my kids. It just seems wrong to exploit these poor children.
-Guru on the Hill
nope i would put it in a savings for them.
No.
Baby pictures would be leaked out into the wider public regardless of whether or not the celebrity parents sell their own pictures. I for one look favorablly upon the practice. 1.) They are sticking it to the paparazzi, and 2.) They’re making the money themselves rather than some stranger with a camera.
We do far worse things to our children…like lie about Santa Claus and send them door-to-door begging for candy like bums and dress them funny and um…well yanno
@pRiNcEsSpOrKiE - I still think it’s wrong- however…Savings? Clever idea… And, eventually, the paprazzi will get a picture anyway.
You have to find some way to pay for their college tuition.
this just pisses me off. the rich get richer for no reason at all other than they had sex. what a bunch of shit.
No… I think that if they are trying to drive down interesting in pictures of their chil though itwould be beer to release them for free… I like it when they give the money to charity. But in order to kill interest I would think flooding the market with free pics would be the better way to go.
Also… another take on it is why should others make money off pictures of their children? At least if they sell the pictures the money will be benifiting their children.
im sure the celebrity worshippers would love to spend their little checks to buy J’Lo’s baby pics whilst they neglect their own kids
in that industry… no. you might as well get credit for making your own baby rather than allow others to profit from taking unauthorized pics of them. besides, this world is driven by money… who wouldn’t for $6mil?? i’d take that money and call it a day… my kid would be set. hahaha
Yeah, why the huge sum of money? I mean its not like those celebs need more $
I’d do it and I wouldn’t blink an eye. If my mom had sold photos of me that’d be fine too.
If I were a celebrity I’d give the money to a good cause though.
@firewillconsume - Yeah, why the huge sum of money? I mean its not like those celebs need more $
The price of celebrity photos is dictated by the market: Supply and demand. The celeberities are in the unique position of offering the first public glimpse of their own children. Bidding and competition between publications like OK! and People is what drives up the percieved worth of the Baby pictures.
The celebrities are buying more than money with these pictures– they’re gaining momentary reprieve from the evil paparazzi.
Why so damn much money-they are already rich!!
Better to release cute pictures of your kids than them showing pics of them picking their nose or something. Seriously… if they give the money to some kind of charity….then they’re doing a good deed.
If there is a market go ahead and sell. I find it hard to believe that people have nothing better to spend their money on but go for it there is the sucker that wants to buy.
No, I mean if it sells their product (magazines/newspapers) they are willing to pay. MAN oh man what I could do w/ just one of those pay days!!!
What are they gonna do with the money? That’s MY question.
More than likely if celebs are getting that much money offered to them, they are pretty high profile, so I don’t think they’re hard up for cash.
I also think they should donate the money to charity, like the March of Dimes or another other charity that deals with babies or children.
Its only a matter of time before celebs start having little see-through windows installed surgically in their bellys so they can show off the their baby’s to tabloids.
As a free market kind of guy, I say sure. Why not?
I think it’s wrong only because the children have no say in it; hence by definition it’s exploitation. And generally I think exploitation is wrong.
I don’t think it’s wrong. It’s ok. Like someone above already said. It’s like sending everyone you know and who’s interested a picture of your newborn. This their case, there are just more people interested. But if I were them, I would still try to shield my kids from paparazzis afterwards.
Nah, if my parents are smart enough to make $6 million dollars off a snapshot of me, that makes them smart and everyone else fucking retarded. Provided that the picture is normal and not one of those potentially embarrassing “Aww look at the nude baby!” ones that you’ll have to hide from future friends and significant others.
That’s extremely selfish of them.
i don’t think it’s cool to sell pics of your kids like that. That’s just weird to me. Just my opinion.
I think it’s their kid and they can do what they want with the photos. The photos will be out there anyway, why not make sure that they’re nice ones and get paid for it too? It’s not the fault of celebrities that people are willing to pay ridiculous sums of money for the photos — that’s the fault of the public, of people who are so celebrity-obsessed that they pay money for the magazines that contain the photos thus driving up the demand and consequentially the sum of money that is reasonable to pay for the photos!
Why in the hell do they need the money in the first place? They are already richer than they should know what to do with.
Personally yeah, I think it’s wrong to pimp out your kids for a fast buck, especially when they have more money than I’ll ever see in my lifetime. If anything, do what Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes did-release them for free. It makes me wonder if these two will ever have enough money.
i think it’s outrageous and rude to the children. i wouldn’t want my kids photos available to the world.
I guess it’s okay if the money goes into a trust fund for the child.
Not at all. It’s stupid to pay that kind of money to buy the photos, but nothings wrong in selling them. Parents like to show off their newborn kids anyway, so it’s not even unnatural.
WOW! THEY ARE HAVING TWINS! I MUST REALLY BE OFF TO DATE WITH CELEBRITIES NOWADAYS! AHHA! NOT! I GIVE NO BS! SELLING PHOTOS OF THEIR CHILD/CHILDREN IS NOT A BIGGIE! GETS THE PAP TO GET OFF ONES BACK! hahaahha!
x0x MK
I think it is a great idea for a celebrity to do that for their children. It is more safe because they are not being chased and harassed for a picture, and it is a smart investment for the child.
A $6 million dollar trust fund would probably insure the child would never have to work if they didn’t want to, that their college would be paid in full, and the child could basically have the kind of life most of us only dream about.
Angelina jolie also sold Shiloh’s pictures and donated the money to charity. I think that is a fantastic idea too.
Either way, the child is under parental consent, and within the boundaries of the law, it is the parent’s right to choose. To me that is no different than a child model or actor who WORKS at the wise old age of 3-4 years old…
That really doesn’t seem right…well, I don’t know. I guess I don’t really care. It’s not like I’d be buying those pictures, and if someone wants them *that* bad, well…whatever. I wouldn’t sell them if it was me.
I think its best when the give the money to charity…I hope they at least save the money for the child to have when they grow up.
no i celebrate a new birth, new member of the house and plenty of potential resources for milk powder.
i think its a selfish way to make money.
powah
Pfff….hell no!! If I knew I could get $6 million for a lousy picture of my kid I’d be having kids like crazy!!!
Then giving them up for adoption….because I don’t really like kids….
It seems like there is a lot of animosity towards celebrities just for being rich. I never got that mentality. I’m guessing maybe some of it is jealousy.
I think it’s kind of funny that they’re selling them. I think it’s sad that enough people care that groups would pay $6 million to have the pictures.
Idk.. all i know is that they better be putting that money away for the babies college education instead of buying their 10th house lol
does it make any difference? people WILL still take pictures of the children, even if the parent threaten to sue. they don’t have much to lose.
i noticed lately since i signed up to your site, i have been much more of a reader than i am a writer. before i used to be a writer than i am a reader.
strange how sometimes when things change once you get into someone’s else site. does that happen to you?
Maybe if they donate it I think it is at least a positive transaction. Either way it is a little unsettling.
No, I would sell such photos if I could get money for them.
There’s never such a thing as too much money.
6 million??! thats crazy! i guess it’s ok, as long as they save the money for the twins!
No, they’re going to get them anyway and why not stick it the magazine?
nah…
okay, now we don’t talk about the money stuff. Their children will exposed to the paparazzi soon, hey are celebrity. They got all people’s attention. If they didn’t give out photos, I’m sure the paparazzi will keep doing their annoying action.
Giving out babys photo is not a crime okay! Paparazzi will not curse or hurt the baby by photos. I’m sure, the celebrity parents will be so proud when their baby cute photos appeared in papers, magazine’s cover page.
It depends on the motivation. If it’s “oh everybody look at how wonderful and cute a family we are”, that just narcissistic. If it’s “we’re going to quench the demand from the crazy tabloids for pictures of our kids so that we can have a moment’s peace”, I don’t have a problem with it.
Nah…
Just hope my child don’t get any pedophiliac stalkers.
I don’t think it is wrong, but I also don’t buy that it keeps the phothogs away either.
It seems a bit wrong. It isn’t like they need the money… I guess if they put it into a trust for their child(ren) then I wouldn’t feel it was as bad – but… I’d rather they release the photos for free. It just seems more the decent thing to do.
I guess we’ll leave exploitation of there children to the pros……
It’s a capitalist nation!
If they’re willing to pay why not.
Parents like to show off their kids, its a fact. In this case, J-Lo can show them off for a hefty fee.
I think it depends on how it is done.
A child that age can’t give informed consent. The parent gives it instead. If the pics are going to be printed anyway why not? Like others have mentioned, I couldn’t give a toss but there are plenty who do.
Please post something relevant.
I think the more important question is… “How would you respond to find out that your parents made millions of dollars from your photographs when you were a baby?”
ryc: I picture you naked all the time, why wouldn’t I picture them naked at church???
Babies don’t have much of a say. I think it’s ridiculous but these people will do anything for money.
she looks really small for carrying twins.
I don’t get why people would spend six mil for a pixelated piece of paper anyway. Its ridiculous, bordering on slightly sickening.
Yes.
really, if someone’s willing to pay it, why not? Alright sure, it’s a but exploitive on the parents part, but I’m sure they have nothing but good intentions *insert sarcasm*
my baby pictures are priceless…
haha
*HUGS*
no. it is a slight deterrent from paparazzi who wants to take the FIRST picture…theyre going to do it anyway, and hey, thats good money. it’s not like you’re trading your baby for 6 million. you’ve already lost your privacy by being famous..
No. Whatever the market will bear. Though I think it is absurd that anyone would be willing to pay that amount of money for the photos, more power to any parents who can get that kind of money. I wish I could have done it!!!
No.
Besides, it’s better then the alternative- paparazzi stalking their children, trying to get snap shots.
Maybe in an ideal world it would be best not to do so. But reality is, people are going to make money off those pictures, and the pictures are going to be snapped and published no matter what the parents do, so they might as well retain some control over it and make money themselves.
Although I do like best what Angie and Brad did, when they sold pics of their kids and gave all the money to charity.
Looks like pimpin’ ‘em out to me.
I wonder what the kid will think of mom and dad when they are old enough to understand. “Hey mom and dad… where’s that money you made off of me as soon as I popped out of the womb? Did you at least save me some of it? Or did you spend it all on the upkeep of your outlandish lavish lifestyle?”
No.
I don’t really think it’s wrong, but I think it’s pathetic.
Sure, why not? It’d probably be better for them to sell or else hand out pictures of their kids rather than the paparazzi trying everything they possibly can to get the photos. At least it’d give them and the babies some peace. Remember that post you put up about Micheal Jackson’s kids, having to hide their faces and whatnot? Who would want to lie like that? I say give them the photos, maybe they’ll back off.
*live
I don’t see what’s so wrong with being rich, or getting more money.
Definitely a lot of jealous poor folk around here. I’d definitely take a $1million if it was offered.
It’s all coming out in the wash anyway…what i want to know is WHO is crazy enough to spend 6 million for those pics? Seems like you can do so much more with that than baby pics that will be out there anyway….
Nope.
I think Tom and Katie did it right by releasing a few for free. Are they having kids because they want them now, or just because it’s trendy and good publicity?
I don’t know about most celebrities, but I know that some have given the money to charity which I think is a good thing!
@Desinflan -
And in 18 years 6 mil will probably just about cover it once you figure in books.
Yes, if they keep the money, cause they don’t need it.
No, If they give the money to a worth while cause or charity.
i think so.
if i was a celebrity ? I think the reason they do it so to remove the whole paparazzi effect….so legally sell it to the highest bidder that way the photo’s will already be circulating and not worth as much on the um photographer “black market” ~~ but i am only assuming…if this was the reason why not!
I don’t see anything wrong with it. So they’re 6 mils richer.
i think it’s wrong, but i can also understand their need for privacy and just letting one magzine get the photos. i would hope they donate the money as angelina and brad did.
Who pays 6 million dollars for a picture of a baby? Suckers, that’s who. If someone wants to give me a ridiculous amount of money for something that is worthless… sure.
ok heres the thing if someone is willing to pay me for pix of my kid id do it. 6 mil is a lot of money just to let somebody take flicks of your child.
It’s hard to tell whether it’s right or wrong, but it is pretty creepy. When your kid is like, 15, what are you going to tell them? Yea, I sold a picture of you for 1.6mil. I love you…. and you’re worth a lot of money.
such a shame at what our world has come down to…im moving to mars.
i won’t comment if it’s right or wrong. it’s their personal choice. but i won’t do it personally.
sure….bank it for college or give it to a charity,-)
No, I don’t think it’s wrong.
Yeah I had this same discussion yesterday when I heard about the 6 Million. I figure its like paying off the mob for protection. If you give one publication the rights to print pictures of your baby, you don’t have to worry about people climbing up on your balcony to snap the pictures or chasing you around.
Besides couples like Brad and Angelina donate that money to charity so it all works out in the end
No.
Not at all.
It doesn’t bother me. I see them doing more of a business trade than something bad. Everyone is happy at the end. The magazine gets what they want and the celebrity get cash in return.