I guessed the other day that it wouldn't take long for the gutter press to circle around Corinne Bailey Rae after the death of her husband.
True to form, a humanity-hating snapper tracked her down and fired in a couple of shots of an intensely private moment of personal grief, and the Hate has no qualms about printing it.
What need does this serve? What public benefit is there? Yes, someone whose partner has just died is grieving and unhappy - it's hardly the most spectacularly surprising thing in the world. Why do we need a picture of this person paying tribute? Why does someone need a camera in their face when they're in an intensely private and soul-searching place? Is that something she deserves, just for being famous?
With these stories there is sometimes a deal done by the person concerned, if they're celebrities via their agents - have this picture but leave me alone the rest of the time. I don't know if this is the case here, but even if that were the case, it would not have been necessarily this woman's choice, merely the lesser of two evils. The existence of hounding paps sitting in cars near her home waiting for the chance to photograph her isn't in doubt. Even if she managed to make a deal to avoid them, and there isn't any evidence she did, that doesn't mean they'll go away. That doesn't mean it's right to print these pictures at all. That doesn't lessen the intrusion.
A grieving Corinne Bailey Rae emerged in public for the first time since her husband was found dead of a suspected drugs overdose.
They know she's grieving but it doesn't matter. Those pictures are getting published anyway. It doesn't look like the act of someone wanting to be seen; she's wearing a hood that covers most of her face.
The Leeds born singer, 28, made a pilgrimage to lay a posy of heather she was carrying at the foot of a 32ft Easter cross at Otley Chevin, West Yorkshire, in memory of her saxophonist husband Jason Rae.
That just strikes me as such a personal act that it seems so insensitive and intrusive to report on it. Whose interests are being served here? What benefit to readers of this get?
It is believed to be the first time the heartbroken singer has left her home since his death at a friend's flat on Saturday.
Yesterday an inquest heard that Jason, 31, died from a suspected overdose.
Like I said earlier, I'm guessing there were paps camped outside her home for some time. Maybe she managed to slip by them? I don't know.
According to friends, Mr Rae, 31, was known to have addiction problems.
"He partied a lot and had struggled with drugs for years," said one.
His drinking and drug taking is said to have caused a rift with his Baptist wife Corinne. And neighbours said she would refuse to let him into their Leeds flat when he came home in a state.
Who cares about any of this? Does it matter if we know any of this or not? Is this 'friend' real or just a concoction to put some colour in the story?
Anyway, what do the commenters think?
No sympathy what so ever.
If you take drugs, you're an idiot!
A bit harsh, I feel.
Celebs who make the taking of vile substances glamourous are selfish, irresponsible morons who should be prosecuted without exception. If they o/d they're doing the idiots who copy them a favour, as it just might enter their thick skulls that shooting up isn't cool, it's stupid and dangerous.
Celebrities are NOT different than any other person, just as celebrity junkies are not different to any other junky. They might have more money and support but that doesn't mean getting help and dealing with an addiction gets any easier because it is something people have to do on their own, no matter their financial of social status.
Leave the poor woman alone to grieve without splashing her photo across papers and websites.
My heart goes out to her. Hadn't she requested that the media respect her privacy and that of her family during such a difficult time? Just wondering...
Yes, she probably did make such a request. Completely ignored by the Hate, who decided to go with these pap pictures anyway. From which we have learned absolutely nothing whatsoever. Yes, grief is a terrible thing - who thought it wasn't? Yes, losing someone close to you is hard to take - everyone knows that. Is there any justification whatsoever? Probably not. Do the Mail care? I doubt it.