Overkill

[vinteuil]

I mentioned Rudolph Valentino above - perhaps the first case of mass hysteria, and someone who'd actually done something people could relate to.

... another early case might be the death of Issa ibn Yusuf in c. 33 AD

[Serial_Apologist]

I mentioned Rudolph Valentino above - perhaps the first case of mass hysteria, and someone who'd actually done something people could relate to. The first person famous merely for being famous, and thus entirely a media construct, was apparently Zsa-Zsa Gabor (b. 1917-ish), who also died just the other day. My point being, it's not that new a phenomenon.

By a weird symmetry, Zsa-Zsa Gabor's son (whom I'm sure none of us has heard of) died just a few days after his mother.

But wouldn't one say that Zsa-Zsa Gabor was more famous for her outrageousness, for the time, than for anything else? She would not be considered outrageous in this day and age.

[Lat-Literal]

A few further points. Circa 1980, I visited The Guardian - several buildings - and was there from about 8pm to 6am to witness how a newspaper was put together. During that visit, perhaps the most memorable part was being shown drawers in which the bulk of obituaries had been written. There was certainly one of the Queen, then in her fifties, and one of several celebrities so the emphasis is decided a long time in advance. Of course, they are added to and the more complicated - and controversial - the individuals become, the more I reckon they are regarded as great news sales. One wonders where, for example, Rolf Harris born in Summer 1930 will be on his demise. The top news story is my guess.

Secondly, the shift towards celebrity has come in an era when there are fewer British deaths in war. In WW2, death was by necessity played down because of the need for morale. These are the origins of the BBC's more measured tones which continue to some extent to this day. However - this is a cynical point - a nation not at war is a nation dangerously upbeat and potentially out of control. Hence, the need to create economic and social gloom and to drive it home at every available opportunity. The newspapers are a world away from the humdrum nature of day-to-day life which while rarely sunny has far fewer dark clouds too. Even the massive - really massive - increase in this century on stories about health are actually illness stories or warnings about illness. They do have their helpfulness but I don't think anyone should be in any doubt that they are designed for misery too.

To return to George Michael, it was Christmas Day. That also inflated the coverage because to flood the airwaves with it was to have control over other people's enjoyment. It isn't the enjoyment that is resented - too much money is involved for that to be negative - but rather the idea that people are temporarily free from the influence of the big machine.

[Richard Tarleton]

... another early case might be the death of Issa ibn Yusuf in c. 33 AD

indeed.

Jedi is a religion these days.

[french frank]

My point being, it's not that new a phenomenon.

Not in isolation, perhaps. But there are more 'famous people' now, and pace what ferney said, I think it's the media that makes them famous - albeit exploiting a rich vein of popularity. The publicity is what makes the enthusiasm grow. Without it people would go on enjoying what they enjoy but in a quieter way.

Possibly, also, people have more time to engage in their leisure pursuits now.

[french frank]

indeed.

Jedi is a religion these days.

Not according to the Charities Commission

[kernelbogey]

...I think it's the media that makes them famous - albeit exploiting a rich vein of popularity. The publicity is what makes the enthusiasm grow...

Though 'the media' are hand in glove with that insidious profession of 'PR'. Nowadays the potential of a performer/event/film etc for creating a following or cult is manipulated early on by commercial interests.

I have been trying, unsuccessfully, to find out how many thousands attended Nelson's funeral in 1806 - in days of rather primitive media - perhaps an early example of a cult figure who was of significance to ordinary folk.

[teamsaint]

Though 'the media' are hand in glove with that insidious profession of 'PR'. Nowadays the potential of a performer/event/film etc for creating a following or cult is manipulated early on by commercial interests.

I have been trying, unsuccessfully, to find out how many thousands attended Nelson's funeral in 1806 - in days of rather primitive media - perhaps an early example of a cult figure who was of significance to ordinary folk.

don't know about Nelson. but this fellow got a good send off in 1870 from 130,000 Geordies.

http://northeasthistorytour.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/the-funeral-of-harry-clasper-1870.html

And he hadn't even appeared in the Boat Race.....

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Not in isolation, perhaps. But there are more 'famous people' now, and pace what ferney said, I think it's the media that makes them famous - albeit exploiting a rich vein of popularity. The publicity is what makes the enthusiasm grow. Without it people would go on enjoying what they enjoy but in a quieter way.

I suppose we need to define what we mean by "media" here - if you mean printed/broadcast "news" (which is how the notion of "overkill" originated on the Forum - how much radio/television/paper news coverage was given to the deaths) then this is no longer necessary: far more people go to to see the Star Wars films, or buy George Michael songs than buy newspapers or watch television news. The media coverage exploits an already-existing fame/popularity that would continue without without that coverage - the media needs the celebrities far more than they need the media.

If by "media" we include Fanzines, blogs, the internet etc ... well even then I don't think that these "make them famous": it's what they do that attracts attention: the rest is just more elaborate form of "word of mouth". The news media follows fame - whenever they try to create it, it doesn't work.

Possibly, also, people have more time to engage in their leisure pursuits now.

Exactly - and more ways of pursuing them (DVD, streamings, computer games). That's why they're no longer buying newspapers or watching television news - and why newspapers and television news needs to focus on what celebrities are up to to survive.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

After all - when was Carrie Fisher last in "the news"? The huge public sorrow at her death isn't because the (news)media have "made her famous" (if it were left to them, she'd've been forgotten yonks ago. She remains in the affections of that public because of their affection for her part in the films - in spite of media neglect over many years.

[MrGongGong]

Not according to the Charities Commission

The same folks who insist that Eton is a "charity" ?
Hummmmm something fishy

If "rev" Paisleys made up church is a religion then this is also http://www.venganza.org

[Petrushka]

I have been trying, unsuccessfully, to find out how many thousands attended Nelson's funeral in 1806 - in days of rather primitive media - perhaps an early example of a cult figure who was of significance to ordinary folk.

I remember Churchill's death and funeral in 1965 and still have some of the newspapers of the event as well as seeing the funeral live on television. There is no doubt that it was a historic event of considerable importance and thousands joined the queue in bitingly cold weather to file past his coffin in Westminster Hall. The overwhelming impression received upon seeing the coverage and reading the newspapers of the time is one of dignity and a total lack of hysteria. The BBC coverage lasted a continuous 4 hours with a dignified commentary from Richard Dimbleby

A different world.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I remember Churchill's death and funeral in 1965 and still have some of the newspapers of the event as well as seeing he funeral live on television. There is no doubt that it as a historic event of considerable importance and thousands joined the queue in bitingly cold weather to file past his coffin in Westminster Hall. The overwhelming impression received upon seeing the coverage and reading the newspapers of the time is one of dignity and a total lack of hysteria. A different world,

Richard Dimbleby was the TV commentator - so good.

[Petrushka]

Richard Dimbleby was the TV commentator - so good.

Indeed, and just amending my post as you did yours.

[P. G. Tipps]

The same folks who insist that Eton is a "charity" ?
Hummmmm something fishy

If "rev" Paisleys made up church is a religion then this is also http://www.venganza.org

Don't be ridiculous .. the religion was established over 2,000 years ago with various 'branches' being formed since reflecting various points of view within it, both mainstream and somewhat eccentric, and arguably even dangerous, tiny minorities. 'Twas ever thus ...

Meanwhile thousands of peaceful mainstream Christians have been (and are) being persecuted and killed in the Middle East merely for professing their faith with hardly a word of comment or protest from the 'liberal' Western media.

Truly shameful.