Dawn Images

At the 2024 MTV VMAs, a paparazzi told up-and-coming pop icon Chappell Roan to “shut the f**k up”. Roan immediately fired back, “You shut the f**k up.” Waving a finger at the paparazzi, she added, “Not me, b***h,” before — as Billboard described it — calmly resuming her red carpet poses as the crowd cheered.

This is not the first time Roan has tried to set boundaries between her and her spectators. The ‘Good Luck, Babe’ singer called out “predatory behaviour” exhibited by some fans earlier in August.

“I’ve been in too many nonconsensual physical and social interactions and I just need to lay it out and remind you, women don’t owe you s**t. I chose this career path because I love music and art and honouring my inner child, I do not accept harassment of any kind because I chose this path, nor do I deserve it,” she wrote on Instagram.

This and other recent instances of celebrities’ privacy being invaded have renewed the conversation around the matter.

The Roan incident comes hot on the heels of actor Aiman Khan and her husband Muneeb Butt being secretly recorded by a fan while they were on a flight with their underaged daughters. This sparked an online debate about filming people without their consent, especially young children who cannot consent to being posted online.

Just a day earlier, Bollywood actor Varun Dhawan highlighted how “insensitive” it was to point cameras in the face of people who are grieving. His statement came after paparazzi extensively photographed and filmed Malaika Arora following her father’s death.

Death becomes a spectacle when linked to a celebrity, as paparazzi record the bereaved and audiences consume the content, even if there is no mal-intent behind their actions. This profiteering dehumanises those in the spotlight, rendering their suffering as mere entertainment with no regard for their humanity.

The crossing of boundaries and invasion of privacy in regards to celebrities’ lives is an age-old tradition, rampant across the globe — both by so-called fans and the paps. From Britney Spears being hounded by paparazzi in the mid-2000s to K-pop group Super Junior being chased by fans resulting in a severe car crash to Bollywood star Alia Bhatt being secretly photographed inside her home last year, no celebrities are safe.

At the heart of the issue is the entitlement felt by those looking into the lives of celebrities because they believe that fans should have unrestricted access to every aspect of a celebrity’s life. Fans often feel they played a role in ‘creating’ their favourite celebrities, while paparazzi justify their actions by claiming they are merely fulfilling their ‘professional duties’.

These perceptions blur the line between professional exposure and personal privacy, and not only does it reduce stars to commodities, it can also put their lives in jeopardy. Let’s not forget Princess Diana’s fatal car crash was partially the result of a high-speed chase by paparazzi. The lengths paps will go to for a click often veer into dangerous territory, putting not only celebrities but also innocent bystanders at risk.

Bollywood power couple Virat Kohli and Anushka Sharma have often requested paparazzi to not photograph their children and while paps generally comply, fans do not. At a time when everyone has a camera on their phone and Instagram locked and loaded, anyone anywhere can film not just celebrities but those near and dear to them — those who have not signed up to be in the public eye.

One of the most glaring wrongs in this relentless pursuit becomes the exploitation of celebrities’ most vulnerable moments. Whether it’s family time, funerals, or deeply personal life events, these intimate experiences are broadcast without consideration for the emotional toll.

It then becomes a vicious cycle, wherein the paparazzi’s intrusion normalises the idea that celebrities’ private lives are for public consumption causing audiences to push boundaries in attempts to get an inside look. A rise in demand for the ‘scoop’ prompts paps to invade celebrities’ privacy even more. The cycle perpetuates a culture of invading privacy and crossing limits in the name of entertainment.

Fans — believing they have a right to information and access to celebrities — sometimes resort to stalking. In Pakistan, both Hania Aamir and Uzair Jaswal have previously spoken about fans showing up outside their homes and waiting for hours, despite their families being inside and asking them to leave. In Aamir’s case, her family had to call the police, while Jaswal’s fans lied to his parents saying they were friends with him, and left after having tea with them.

Hardcore fans need to remember that infringing on an individual’s personal space, be it their home or their person, is simply not okay. Mehwish Hayat experienced a fan violating her boundaries at a meet-and-greet in Houston, Texas when they tried to put their arms around her. Hayat called out the fan on her Instagram account, saying “some people need to earn manners of meet-and-greet when around women.”

What we seem to forget, as we scrutinise and invade the most private aspects of an individual’s life in our consumer frenzy, is the basic right to privacy and personal autonomy. Fame does not mean someone has forfeited the right to say no and to decide what they want to share with millions across the world.

Physical repercussions aside, there are very real mental health consequences that celebrities could undergo because of constant surveillance. Spears is perhaps the epitome of what happens when one is persistently in the public eye. In 2006, photographers outside a Manhattan hotel descended on the popstar as she held onto her then eight-month-old son, CNN reported.

According to the article, “She stumbled in the process and a later photo, taken through a window, shows her in tears as she holds her son, seemingly trying to shield the world from seeing her visibly upset.

“It was a moment many headlines overlooked to instead focus on the fact that Spears almost dropped her infant child while trying to avoid aggressive photographers.”

Not only was an infant put in danger, but the emotional impact was apparent. Spears is just one — albeit extreme — example. Countless people in the public eye undergo this and, in Roan’s words, “predatory behaviour (disguised as ‘superfan’ behaviour) that has become normalised because of the way women who are well-known have been treated in the past” makes them feel “unsafe”.

The issue then becomes one of entitlement, especially with fans, when celebrities are asked why they chose a path of fame when they did not want to constantly be in the public eye.

To this we say — we do not own celebrities, nor do we possess the right to know every intimate detail about them. Yes, they may be in the spotlight, but that does not mean they are a commodity or cannot establish boundaries, especially when it can cause tangible harm. It is completely valid — and should not be necessary — for someone like Roan to say, “What I do not accept are creepy people, being touched, and being followed”.

While fans and paparazzi are both big factors that play into a celebrity’s fame, this does not mean they owe us anything in return. We should remember that (most) celebrities are famous because of their own talents, and while love and appreciation for fans are important, it does not give them unrestricted access to another human’s private life.

In a time where media consumption, bolstered by social media, is at an all-time high, it’s crucial to reconsider the line between public interest and personal invasion, and more importantly, to recognise that crossing that line has real, damaging consequences.

To quote Roan yet again, “Please stop being weird”.