Comments on: Hugh Laurie Could Boycott ET

By: Ruby

Ruby — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:31:07 +0000

Regardless of what he did or didn’t do, if you can’t respect someone’s privacy in death at least be respectful enough of the loved one’s left behind. If he overdosed then they already know about it and shouldn’t have it shoved in their face every time they turn around or turn on the television. Let people grieve in peace. Flaunting someone’s flaws in public after they have died fixes nothing. They aren’t around to learn anything from their public humiliation.

By: Simon

Simon — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:31:22 +0000

I thought the whole fact of ET/The Insider slandering a DEAD man would have been enough, Denise. It is not close to being compared to paparazzi photos.

By: Denise

Denise — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 20:34:08 +0000

How can the truth be considered slander? If Heath Ledger was abusing drugs and died as a result of that, then it is news, not slander. I agree that it is probably in bad taste for ET to run the interview. But it is no worse or any different from magazines printing paparazzi photos of our favorite stars and their family members when they are out on their own time. You also have to consider that there is an audience who want the gory details of his death and history of drug use. As sad as it is, once you become a celebrity, you lose all privacy. Whether to boycott ET or not is one’s personal choice.