Bad attention or no attention at all?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by EllyDicious, Nov 6, 2009.

  1. EllyDicious

    EllyDicious made of AMBIGUITY V.I.P. Lifetime

    If you were a public person, an artist like singer/actor/model or whatever, would you like to have media's bad attention or no attention at all?
    does it hurt more when they write bad for you but at least they write, or it hurts more when they don't write at all?? or none?


  2. icegoat63

    icegoat63 Son of Liberty V.I.P. Lifetime

    Im a very recluse individual to start with. So I'll definitely go with no attention at all. If its not attention I can be proud of because of whatever work puts me in the public eye in the first place.... I sure as hell dont want to be noticed for bad reason, just so I'm noticed :hah:
  3. EllyDicious

    EllyDicious made of AMBIGUITY V.I.P. Lifetime

    i'd rather have bad attention, than no attention at all lol.
    it feels bad being forgotten when you're a public person.
  4. Rebeccaaa

    Rebeccaaa yellow 4!

    I'd only want to be in the public eye for good reasons, so I'd prefer no attention.

    I know that apparently 'any publicity is good publicity,' but meh, I wouldn't want bad press, I'd rather just be average and forgotten and work towards getting noticed in a positive way.
  5. EllyDicious

    EllyDicious made of AMBIGUITY V.I.P. Lifetime

    why would you care for bad publicity if your friends/family or everyone you loved, trusted you?
    as long as people i care for, trust me enough to know that bad publicity is not true, than why would i care?
  6. Rebeccaaa

    Rebeccaaa yellow 4!

    Because whatever I was famous for, say artist.. it might put people off supporting me or buying my stuff if they read in the news that I'd killed a baby or something :dunno:
  7. TheMaster

    TheMaster Registered Member

    I'd only want attention for the good things, so for that purpose only I'd prefer to have no attention. Also if it's possible and if this thread lets this path, I could build up on it, so no big worries.
  8. EllyDicious

    EllyDicious made of AMBIGUITY V.I.P. Lifetime

    it depends though. for example: Chris Brown is now known as woman-beater, but despite that, people keep on buying his albums no matter what.
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
  9. wooly

    wooly I am the woolrus

    Right now, i'd say no attention as opposed to bad attention. But if i was a celebrity then i'd definitely take the bad attention.

    It's true that there's no such thing as bad publicity when you;re in the public eye, and often times it can earn you more money/fame than most forms of good publicity. It keeps people interested more and after all isn't that what being a celebrity is about?

    I don't plan on being a celebrity anytime soon though so i'll save all my public indecency/crazy drug habits/baby dangling/car crashing shenanigans until i hit the big time :p
    A perfect example is Michael Jackson. How many years did he stay famous purely on the back of bad publicity? Yeah he made some great music, but he stayed in the headlines LONG after he stopped making music. Purely because of how messed up his life was.
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
  10. FindMuck

    FindMuck Registered Member

    I'd rather have bad attention, because if you are an artist any attention is good attention. If an you're really that bad or just average or for some reason you can't get noticed then no one would comment on you. If they are commenting on you, you either famous enough to be making money or good enough where they think they have to knock you down or they're jealous for some reason. In general though, for my purposes, I want to be a politician when I'm out of school, and for that I'd rather have no attention than bad attention because then bad attention can really mess up your career.

Share This Page