RPM said:
RetiredAg said:
RPM said:
No one would give two craps if she had never been in Star Wars.
And nobody, outside of family and friends, would "give two craps" about John F. Kennedy being shot if he weren't president. Famous people dying will always garner more attention than some regular person on the street. It doesn't make their death any less tragic though.
allow me to laugh my ass off at your straw man argument.
If you can't see the absurdity of comparing a president getting assassinated to the death of a habitual drug using acctress, I won't be wasting time arguing.
The point is that people "care" when famous people die. Why? Because they're famous. Whether they're famous for acting in a movie or being president, the point is people "care" because they've actually heard of them. Your original statement is silly because it applies to anyone that is famous, regardless of why they're famous.
People make these kind of painfully obvious statements as if they're offering some deep insight. Of course people wouldn't talk about this or "care", outside her friends/family, if she weren't famous. We would have no clue who she was. That was my point with JFK. Had he died in WW2, his family would have cared, but to everyone else, he'd have never even really individually registered with them. But, he did when he was famous.
So congrats on your "insight". The real point, though, is that famous or not, her death is sad. Drug addiction is horrible, and even if she weren't famous, she left behind people that suffer. Her celebrity status doesn't make it any more of less tragic.