Miquette

Probabilmente son io che son ciecata, però non ho visto, tra le notizie internazionali, il suo incontro con Dario Fo, mi spiacerebbe non ci fosse visto che uno dei nostri nobili Nobel.. Inserisco qui in link you tube, e se mai fosse già stato messo, bè, lo avremo pure qui

I thought she spoke of the Italian program, and is broadcast by Sky in Italy, which is a private TV station, not national television: a Murdoch tv and I totally agree with you! I also do not see much difference "moral and ethical" with the other xfactor

it's a Rupert Murdoch tv...

I'm not aggressive, I'm not by nature,I only and always try to reason and think about anything. I did not know his disapproval of 'journalistic article, in fact I was certain, view photos posted on the magazine paper, I was sure it had been stolen but then agreed. Again, knowing the usual perverse nature of the director, so it seems. I do not agree with the tabloid magazines, I say it here and I have said above in another post. I do not buy them, I don't care. I have no interest in knowing what he does and with who he goes, neither he nor others. I do not care even know if he is a good person. Enough for me to be a good artist .. My speech was about what is good or not good, and what is wrong while being in shape can then essentially have a positive end. And it's true, I am deeply annoyed by a certain fetishism, in respect of each artist .. I find it a bit 'disgusting, voilà ..

And he just take photographes in close-up parts of itself, to make themselves more sexy and desirable? What is the difference between that and the image of the newspaper? Are not both "stolen" in this sense? Think about it .. Photos of the family were published by himself, so his family is not hidden. What bothers? The image of his happy family, or the optics in which they are seen? And the images in the foreground, they do not intend to diverge from the other exactly and different optics? These are stolen and distorted both, but those of the magazine are happy, the other sordid and feticiste....which do you prefer?

But Mika made but mika published photos with his family a lot of times, such as photos or shirtless on the beach (for example, on the Dead Sea) with ​​cousins and sisters ​​.. what is the difference? focus on a particular anatomy is different than showing an artist, albeit without a shirt, singing in a scenic backdrop. As a woman (but perhaps also as a human being) I would be more disturbed that someone photographers my bottom, maybe less if he takes photos of my family.

Please, try to appreciate my effort. I'm trying to reiterate a concept is not so immediate, simple, in a language that I write barely. Anyone's privacy should be affected, even probably no one should be treated as an object but as a human being. Especially if he's an artist, a writer and a healthy carrier of thought, I believe, as I believe you, too, it is right to pay attention to his work and not only to its cover. Whether what he does on stage and in life, should be looked at with respect and ethics, not morbid, if you really had respect for his person. For this I called "invasive" - and certainly distasteful - a certain kind of look towards his body, not because it is not shown but because it has nothing to do with his artistic message. But this, both here and elsewhere, because he is a public figure and moody, can not be. However, if you can afford to count the re-growth of each individual hair, regardless of his songs, why do not accept the "invasive" "horrible" "stolen" appearance of him and his - supposed - family on a public holiday at the sea? It is better the shape or substance of the image and the message? (sooo sorry.. forgive me for the language, please!)

I'm talking about the picture in the paper, I did not even read it, I don't buy that magazine

I'm not talking about the right to post them or not. You don't want to post this, it is right. I speak of the fact that in that article, even if stolen, there is nothing harmful, there are no the names and the vision that the public has of this is positive. Personally for me the signifier is always more important than the meaning, the concept, the substance rather than the form, the casing. And in this case, as the cover is horrible, the message is good .. only this

è da un ora che lo ripeto... e con che fatica...

and his pubes - even covered - in the foreground, or the pictures of the growth of his chest hair, are not as invasive? someone explain to me the meaning of invasive, please .. (in Italian is the same word ..)

But you tell me that this is his father, i don't even know! and no one who reads the newspaper will know...

In my own home, these journals are not purchased. I am exactly like you, I think like you about this type of printing but I know its existence. I do not speak of their ethical or cultural value, it doesn't exist, I'm reading the message that these images give and in this case it is not negative and even not morbid. That is all. And for a tabloid of this kind, it is so much... I find other images so much more morbid ..

You can see his (I suppose) dad and some other people (I don't even know who they are ..)only in web pictures, not on the paper magazine. On it there is a girl, not naked but in a bathing suit, but her face is cover by her elbow... in England there are no tabloids? In fact, it is a positive article, good for Italy: a happy little family on vacation .. with dog I repeat, shocked me more a kind of fetishism, that images of this kind, where no one knows who is none, because there is nowhere written. And strange to say for this kind of tabloid magazine , there is no kind of malice in the photos. And knowing that newspaper and its director, I am certain that it has been re-arranged and negotiated in ad hoc ... (perdonate il mio inglese, vi prego!)

but now he is no longer just a singer .. and it is his choice .. I do not defend a certain type of photo or newspapers, as I detest some photos quite a bit "too fetishist", posted by fans everywhere. But it's part of that world, and... is his own choice (sorry, I read it wrong, it happens often in English .. sorry again ..)