Blog sites, calm down. The line between public and private. An Editorial.

(Credit: Mario Testino/Vogue)

Hello Taylor Nation,

In the latest edition of Vogue magazine, the Sparkly Dressed gets interviewed by Jonathan Van Meter. There’s a section in which she talks about not being cool in middle school. In there, you can find a part in which she talks about girls that always looked cool and older. This is a quote:

“There’s always that seventh-grade girl who looks like she’s 25. And you’re like, How do you do it? How do you do it, Sarah Jaxheimer?” She lets out a comically ear-piercing shriek: “Why is your hair always so shiny?!

– Taylor Swift, Vogue

Blog sites, calm down. The Outspoken One reached into the vault and pulled the name out of her past, but it was just an example of a girl that Taylor thought was cool and had pretty hair. The internet however doesn’t really stop, even if it not theirs to speculate.

Popdust found the actual Sarah Jaxheimer and interviewed her, making some assumptions that the Enchantress never actually stated. They wanted to know if she was a cheerleader captain (a reference to You Belong With Me). She wasn’t and Taylor never said that. They wanted to know if she made Taylor feel like an outsider (a reference to The Outside). She didn’t and Taylor never said that. They asked if Sarah was a mean girl (a reference to Mean). No… actually she likes Taylor’s music. And Taylor never said that. There was one question that pretty much clears it all up from both sides. Why is Sarah’s name in Vogue? “Maybe she just really liked my hair?” said Sarah, “I can’t think of any reasons.” You can find the actual article at Popdust.

The Fearless One herself has cleared it up on Twitter, and hopefully stopped the speculation for good:

https://twitter.com/#!/taylorswift13/status/160621667490607104

When you are in the entertainment business, your life becomes public. There’s a moment between wishing for it and a moment when you have to bear it. The Blonde With The Sparkly Guitar is already past that. When that happens, you’re aware there’s people living a public life, such as celebrities and people living their own, private lifes. When you blog, when you report stuff, speculation and theory are rampant but I believe you should be responsible for what you say and write.

I am happy to report on both the Queen of Sparks and The Agency because exposure is part of their lives. There’s a point where their public life stops and their private one begins that is specially clear when we’re talking about private people that surround them. Since the line may be blurry for some, I try to draw a safe and sound line far before where it becomes debatable. That is why there are no “profiles” for Taylor’s brother or her best friend in this site. They are not in the public eye although they often show up on the sidelines.

There is also a clear difference between a picture that Taylor posts on Instagram and one posted by someone that works with her in their private Facebook account that you couldn’t see unless you were a friend of them. The first, Tay is obviously sharing with the world and the second is obviously private, or at least that’s what I believe. I try and chase down the source of every picture I post and give credit where credit is due. Even when that is not possible, at least I state where I found the picture. I don’t say all sites should do this, but at least don’t claim that the picture is yours unless you actually took it.

While we’re on the subject, I rely on my disclaimer (fair use for non-profit sites) to use pictures that are copyright. That’s very much in debate lately with the whole strike against the SOPA/PIPA bills. Yes, all fansites would have lost the ability to post any pictures at all. Still feel it doesn’t affect you? Fortunately, the bills were shelved indefinitely. Victory? For now it is.

Blog responsibly.

(Credit: Jonathan Leibson/Getty Images)

The Sparkly Dressed is at the Sundance Film Festival, she attended the premiere of the documentary Ethel on Friday, January 20.

Coming up in the Calendar!

  • February 12: The 54th Annual Grammy Awards will take place at the Staples Center in Los Angeles. Taylor Swift is nominated for Best Country Album for Speak Now, Best Country Song for Mean and Best Country Solo Performance for Mean. The show will be broadcast live on CBS from 8:00pm to 11:30pm ET/PT.

(Sources: VoguePopdust)

6 thoughts on “Blog sites, calm down. The line between public and private. An Editorial.

  1. I really liked this editorial. I’ve always had reservations when I see people updating their tumblrs and twitters with pictures they’ve found from people’s personal facebooks and twitters who may be unaware that fans are seeking out celebrity photos. IE: From Taylor’s birthday party, so many personal photos surfaced and I’m not sure those should have gotten out, out of respect for privacy. I think Taylor probably took to twitter to clarify that specific statement because a name was used and a person was targeted and that just wasn’t fair when people who aren’t consenting or benefitting in any way seem to get sucked into this whole thing. Well done, I liked this a lot. Good food for thought!

  2. Enjoyed your take on censorship. You always have a way for putting things simply and to the point. Thank you for always stating your opinion, yet staying true to the outspoken one. =) BTW she has a private facebook account?

  3. Just a little correction to your comments on SOPA/PIPA.
    As your blog acts as news site and follows all current legal guidelines (ie. source creditation) it wouldn’t have been affected by the new laws.
    Although you are correct that fan-sites could’ve been in danger, although the copyright holders can already order their removal and haven’t so I’d suggest not buying into the panic too much.
    It’s the worst case scenario not the most likely.
    They actually encourage fan-sites – that’s why so many outtakes and unused candids get released.

    P.S. You do an awesome job here, keep it up.

    1. The SOPA/PIPA bills allow mainstream media to police and block suspicious sites. Basically it’s a reversion of the “innocent until proven guilty” into “blocked because of suspicious activity.” So it would fall unto me to prove I am innocent by employing legal advice and facing the accuser’s considerable legal leverage. Meanwhile, my website would be offline.

      The bills have been shelved indefinitely, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be more.

Comments are closed.