On Wednesday and Friday in class, we watched a movie called "My Kid Can Paint That" about (well, I'm pretty sure everyone has heard the story about Marla Olmstead, a 4 year old girl from Binghamton, NY whom painted as if she were picasso) and it rose a number of questionable areas of focus in the Ethics of Journalism.
Where should you draw the line? Where do you allow it continue? When does it get out of hand? What effects does the inevitably have on the person(s) of interest long & short term?
Once Marla became the center of attention, after going on numerous talk shows and interviews, it became widely questioned if her father was the person whom coached her along and helped to create some of the pieces of art. Many went crazy just thinking about the mere thought that the father was the one whom created it. She was heralded as an angel, a gift from god, and therefore to hear that she might not have been the creator, came as a major shock to many. But at one point when all this came about, Marla's attitude changed from the outgoing, bubbly and vivacious little girl to a quite and more reserved toddler. It was questioned at that time even more if the attention surrounding Marla should continue on the same path because she was now a gimmick to the outside world.
It questions how much is too much...is just the overview enough?
[this is good] People are so stupid, how can "normal" adults manage to mess up a kid so much? Not to sound callous, but some people just have odd brains. Mozart is a good example. Yes, he was brilliant, and his brain was probably different than most people's. Big whoop. Enjoy the kid's talent and let them have fun in life.
Posted by: Emmi | May 20, 2009 at 07:12 PM
That's exactly the way that I feel.
Posted by: Kareena D. McCalla | May 20, 2009 at 07:22 PM