Exposure: The Public Self Explored

27 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Exposure he Public Self Explored P. David Marshall Something has changed. These are prophetic words that provoke all sorts of anx- ieties and anticipations and it is a major challenge to a researcher to show they are true. In this chapter, I want to capture a changed “structure of feeling” in contem- porary culture that I think is best encapsulated through the word and concept of “exposure.” Exposure, conceptually, is a way to express what we are collectively expe- riencing – individual by individual and individual to individual. If we take the vari- ations in meanings of the word exposure, it allows us to analyze our contemporary world where the public self is highly privileged. Exposure by deinition expresses the cultural power of technology in “fabricating the image,” “the attention of the general public,” “the selling and exhibition of products,” as well as “riskiness” and being “sub- ject to external inluences” (Oxford English Dictionary, 2013). This chapter will unpack this new moment of public visibility, from its historical connections with establishing reputation and signiicance, to its celebrity iconicity and the develop- ment of the visible presentation of diferent boundaries of public and private, and inally to how the individual is more than invited to participate in a world of general exposure and learns to inhabit the risks that such a world entails. What is revealed in this exposition of the expansion of the public self is that it is intimately and intricately connected to celebrity culture, which in its experimentations with the presentation of the public self and revealed self over the last century has served as the key ped- agogical model for the contemporary moment and its use and relation to images of the self. The new public self is both dependent on and closely identiied with the tropes of public identity of our most famed and infamous. The chapter is divided or applicable copyright law. into sections which pick up on each of the etymological origins of the word expo- sure noted above, to help identify both the various contemporary meanings of the term and their relationship to the history of the exposed image, and then continue with an exploration of how that particular form of exposure relates to and has led to our current moment of the ubiquity of the exposed public self. A Companion to Celebrity, First Edition. Edited by P. David Marshall and Sean Redmond. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 498 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Technological Change Exposure: A chemical reaction in photographic development which fabricates the image. (OED, 2013) The image is perhaps the key to understanding the changed contemporary condi- tion. For almost two centuries, we have exposed ourselves to the imprint of the pho- tograph. From its earliest incarnations, there was a focus on the portrait in its trans- lation from the painterly portrait of only the elite to its exposure of the middle class in those nineteenth-century iterations that were provisioned by the technology. As Hearn’s work on cartes de visite revealed, the interplay of status and photography was well in place by the 1860s, as millions of portrait cards of everyday and famous individuals were regularly exchanged like postcards (Hearn 2013). The capacity to be widely spread and exposed came early in the production of photography, as did the desire – particularly with the cartes de visite – to link one’s images to the famed and famous: the value of one’s own collection of cartes bestowed a power of personal connection and prestige. In a similar vein, photographers’ reputations were built on photographing the most famous. The technology of the photograph was very much about exposure – a chemical composition when exposed to light produced a negative image of reality that was reversed through a further chemical process for exhibition. There are several ele- ments in the history of this exposure technology which are of particular importance. First of all, in those irst decades of the craft the photographic exposure demanded an expertise that was professionalized and, in style of production, replicated the artist’s studio. Early photography had a style and composition of “singularity”: at the very least, the image produced was valuable and represented something unique, with diferent tints and casings used to highlight the unique nature of the photo- graph. Daguerreotypes, the irst generation of the photograph, were produced on a single, individual plate (Perich 2011). However, the reality of the photograph in the near future was very diferent from this constructed singularity: the photograph as a technology was ininitely reproducible and any particular image could be used repeatedly. As the technology simpliied, the capacity to take a photograph likewise became much easier. With that ease in production, multiple photographs would be taken of any particular event or any sitter. Photographers became adept over time at being able to discern the best exposure to be processed and developed into a pho- tograph from their negatives and proof sheets. The technology thus permitted the or applicable copyright law. capacity for an industry and business to advance. In the American context, one of the irst successful business models that relied on multiple reproductions of pho- tographs was the yearbook or album for colleges and universities. For instance, the Massachusetts photographer George K. Warren successfully provided school year- books for Harvard, Brown, and Dartmouth, among many others, including the Uni- versity of Michigan, by the 1850s (Perich 2011: 2–3). Photography as a technology was used to document graduating classes, their professors, and a series of activi- ties. What is curious in this early stage of the technology of reproduction was that EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 499 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. the contents and the covers were somewhat individualized for each student/client. Nonetheless, the records and images were designed to focus on both achievement and reputation. The yearbook has continued as a mainstay of the profession of pho- tography and in many ways was a direct precursor – as its name implies and as its origins within the university system underline – of contemporary Facebook. Reproducibility onto simple surfaces such as paper, achieved in the irst decade of photography, allowed the photograph to be used efectively in the development of images and exposure in the press – irst as engravings based on photographs in news- papers and magazines that could be reproduced ad ininitum, and then later the pho- tographic images were used directly (by 1867 as half-tones in magazines and by1880 in newspapers; Keller 2011: 146) – a reality that was commonplace by the 1890s (Peres 2008: 38). These technical qualities of photographic reproduction emerging in the last 25 years of the nineteenth century allowed for a trifurcating photographic industry of exposure. First came the professional photographers who catered to the populace in the tradition of the yearbook: they worked to document people in typi- cally formal settings. Second, by the 1890s, there was an elite group of photographers which included photojournalists (Keller 2011: 145) who were employed by news- papers and magazines to document what was seen to be signiicant and ultimately newsworthy. By 1913, this second group of professional photographers included those commissioned to photograph the rich, beautiful and famous for the new illus- trated and fashion magazines such as Vogue, launched in 1892, and a subindustry of glamour photography grew (Checefsky 2008: 85). The third element of the pho- tography industry was the emergence of the amateur photographer: dependent on easy-to-operate cameras and rolls of ilm that could be developed by industry labs operated by the camera companies themselves, such as Eastman Kodak, this served to expand the dimension of exposure of the self in the twentieth century. Each sector of the photography industry developed somewhat diferently in the twentieth century and in reverse order to their former nineteenth-century power. Most dramatically, the third sector of amateur photography had exploded by the beginning of the last century with the production of cameras such as the Brownie by Kodak for 1 dollar in the United States (Lothrop 1978: 1), thereby making the technology of photography accessible to millions of people worldwide. The tech- nology also was an elemental part of the media industry, the second sector of the industry and its construction of a powerful second world of images and exposures where the famed and the powerful were made visible. This visibility of the famous was signiicantly diferent than the icon of the monarch that had provided public visibility in earlier centuries via coins and currency, and certainly beyond the sin- or applicable copyright law. gularity of the image of portraits of the famous and the powerful that few saw with any regularity. The focus on personality and stars migrated and expanded, partially through photography and magazines, from the theatrical world to the ilm world in the early decades of the twentieth century (Staiger 1991). Magazines, through both feature proiles and advertisements, focused on the famed. In the early editions of Photoplay and Moving Picture World, famed players were used to build ilm audi- ences and loyalties with ilm companies. By the middle of the century, magazines such as Life that focused on the public self in photo-essays began producing color EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 500 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. photographs both for the cover and within their pages (Garner 2008: 78–81). By the second decade of the twentieth century, the professional photographer beyond those working for media outlets – the irst and largest sector of the photographic industry in the nineteenth century – began also producing the publicity photo portrait, the “eight-by-ten” glossy for the portfolio of any aspiring actor, used to announce them to prospective casting directors and talent agents and also easily reproduced on the playbill if the actor was successful in landing a part. In a more general sense, personalized exposure came in these three very clear forms via photographic technology and remained with some consistency up until the digital generation and distribution of images in the late twentieth and early twenty- irst centuries. Thus, what we could call a formal social world became the domain of the professional photographer, with works commissioned for weddings or school photos and, on a more regular basis in the American middle class, for the annual family Christmas card portrait sent to family, friends and business acquaintances. The public world was clearly connected to the deployment of publicity photographs for the famous and those desiring fame, and both of these groups were very small. The third form was the private photograph which was taken by family members, generally of themselves. This kind of exposure ended up in family photo albums or was saved for family slide shows – representing for Bourdieu a middlebrow and highly structured form of expression (Bourdieu and Boltanski 1990) – while the pro- fessional photographs were generally displayed on mantelpieces as the more proper version of family members (see, for example, Kuhn 1995). There is no question that technologically speaking the photography of the self was widely distributed before the digital era; nonetheless, digital technology pro- vided a changed sense of possibility in a number of directions that only makes sense once one understands this history of photographic exposure. The irst of these clear transformations related to instantaneity. Digital technology related to photography connects it to television and electronic technologies and their capacity to construct images. This kind of insight is less signiicant than that these formations of images have the possibility of being more leeting. It should be remembered that one of the diiculties in early television was actually recording what was produced and early television’s images were not archived with ease. Digital photography – like television – produces an instant image. The former development time, and even the time spent in taking the role of exposed ilm for development to the pharmacy or photo-kiosk, vanishes with digital photography. The closest precursors to this sense of instanta- neity in photography were the Polaroid Land cameras of the early 1960s and 1970s (originally developed in less portable structures in 1947) and their commercially or applicable copyright law. located cousins, the photo booths at fairs, arcades and train stations – where within minutes the image would gradually appear on the photographic paper pushed from the camera/machine itself. The speed of “production” of a digital camera allows for instant perusal at least as a digital image, making the appearance of a Polaroid photo seem very slow. Even more remarkable in this history of digital photography was its migration to other devices as an added application. Thus, by the late 2000s, it was standard for a mobile phone to have the capacity to take photos. With more widespread use of tablets and iPads, their use as a camera was normalized. Not only EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 501 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. were photos instantly produced, the constant presence of cameras made it possible for any moment to become an image. A second diference between digital photography and its roll-of-ilm precursor was sheer cost. If we look back in time a Polaroid image in 1960 would cost up to 3 dollars an exposure. The cost of development of a roll of ilm varied greatly over the twentieth century, but by the 1970s it could cost up to 10 or 15 US dollars to develop 24–36 photos (Cohan 2011). In contrast, the cost of a digital image became progressively smaller and smaller as the cameras developed. As the cost of the tech- nology dropped and the general quality improved (through the density of pixels) for increasingly mobile cameras, the cost per picture ultimately became an absurd form of comparison between old and new technology and the closest identiiable cost per photo was perhaps the battery time and the electricity used. Neither of these “costs” were at all visible in taking a digital image. What has changed is the value of the individual image; in other words, digital technology allowed for ininitesimal pleni- tude in the production of photos and the material value of the photo to disappear as a factor in production. Indeed, even the viewing of photos no longer requires their printing; photos are often shared by viewing them on the technology itself, whether on a phone, a tablet or computer, and sent by email (see for example Kember 2012). Thirdly, digital photography was also diferently networked in terms of distribu- tion. There is no question that from the earliest moments of professional photogra- phy in the nineteenth century, a photograph had the capacity to be reproduced and this meant that an individual image could appear hundreds and thousands of times in diferent settings and locations. For example, the school yearbook not only produced hundreds of photos of students, it also produced hundreds of copies of these photos for each album produced. Similarly, as newspapers became more reliant on images for the selling of their product, it is certainly true that images could be distributed very quickly by the photo/picture agencies that were servicing the daily needs of newspapers by the beginning of the twentieth century. Despite these quite incredible systems of distribution, like the relative cost and the instantaneity of digital photos, the contemporary electronic distribution of images is incomparably more diverse, more personalized and deals with sheer numbers of photo images that dwarf past models. To get a sense of this diference in the contemporary moment of exposure, it is worth at least listing the volume of images that are now distributed through the most popular applications. By 2013, an estimated 250 billion photos had been uploaded to Facebook since their photo service was irst launched (Robertson 2013; Wag- ner 2013), with more than 350 million new images uploaded per day (Crook 2013; or applicable copyright law. Fiegerman 2013; Smith 2013). In 2014, Flickr, a service dedicated to photos, averaged 1.83 million photos shared per day (Michel 2015). Sharing and networking image sites such as Tumblr, as forms of microblogging where images are sometimes collected thematically, are also locations for photos and photo-sharing. Similarly, Twitter allows users to post photos with its 140 charac- ter microblogging format that further extends the networking and the uploading of photos. Augmenting these still images of exposure are the shared videos that circu- late in online culture. YouTube has a mixture of commercial and personal channels EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 502 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. with 300 hours of video uploaded every minute (YouTube 2015). Both Instagram and Twitter through Vine have expanded to short-form videos. On average, approx- imately 12 million 6-second Vine videos per day are shared on Twitter (Smith 2015). Instagram (2015) self-estimates that about 70 million new photos are uploaded daily among 300 million monthly active users. Snapchat, which allows photo and video “snaps” to be posted to friends and then the “snap” disappears, claims an upload rate greater than Facebook of over 700 million photo and video snaps as a younger gen- eration redeines itself away from Facebook (Shontell 2014). Even with the exclusion of videos, the volume of photos as well as the movement and sharing of photos means that what we have is quite diferent than any previous use of photography. Although we cannot claim that all these photos are “selies” – as they are now referred to (Day 2013) – we can conidently claim that the images are exposures of the self indirectly or quite directly. The actual selie has exploded into popular use since 2010 when front-facing phone cameras, such as the iPhone 4, made it possible to see your own image as you were taking the picture. The photograph has become a naturalized extension of the self; as Van Dijk (2008) points out, we have moved from photography used primarily as a tool for memory, to photography used primarily as a tool for the formation and tracking of self-identity. Our photo-sharing moves this new digital generation of the image into a technological apparatus that is transforming our construction of what is exposed publicly and what is held more privately. Finally, from a technological perspective, it is also important to identify the rela- tive ease in the manipulation of digital images. Barthes continues to be valuable in identifying the reality-efect of photos where the connotation, because of its clear indexical relationship to the real, gives it an authenticity and an ideological value (Barthes 2010; Barthes and Heath 1988); however, popular software such as Photo- shop, along with a host of other even simpler applications for the manipulation of images, means that the capacity for shaping that reality beyond the image’s enclosed frame is ever present. Personal exposure through the digital image has to be under- stood on two levels. First, it is a normalized part of our everyday life to have self- images widely available. And second, the technology of transformation along with the technology of sharing and commenting means that the “anchoring” of an image, its ixing to a speciic meaning, is always in potential lux and liquidity. These dif- ferent “realities” of contemporary exposure will make more sense when investigated through the other meanings of exposure. or applicable copyright law. Publicity and the Emergence of Glamour Exposure: Drawing attention of the general public. (OED, 2013) The relationship between images and the public sphere has always been close. If we think simply of religious icons, we can see that their images conveyed a meaning to a populace and a sense of solidarity and belonging/exclusion through the shared images and symbols of a particular church and religion. Howells (2011) has taken EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 503 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. this one step further in his work and linked the celebrity image and its connection to the person as a contemporary form of holy relic: the photograph in all its structure of aura is a reference to the celebrity, a way to ritualistically and with reverence con- nect to the celebrity through the image. Beyond the technological capacities of fab- ricating and distributing images, exposure also refers to attracting the public’s gaze. What is critical in understanding our current circulation and exchange of billions of images is that it relies on a system of communication that was built on a much more controlled and restrained movement of images – perhaps with a quality that tries to produce an almost religious value in the exposures produced. Those much more limited numbers of images functioned with much more power in the past and with greater capacity to draw our attention. For example, newspapers and magazines used news and day-deining images on their front pages and covers to attract the attention of a buying and subscribing public to their stories. These much more limited images were instrumental in shaping our public memory and our understanding of what was signiicant and important. Contemporary exposure which involves hundreds of millions exposing them- selves via online culture, in particular, is at least partially built on systems of individual exposure that have operated for the last century and more. These pedagogic models for contemporary exposure are drawn from the way in which the public personality has been displayed in various domains of popular and political culture. In politics, for instance, it is interesting that when Lyndon B. Johnson succeeded Kennedy as US President in November 1963, the only person who had unfettered access to him was his personal photographer, Yoichi Okamoto. Okamoto has claimed he took more than 11,000 pictures of the new president in his irst three months in order to construct the public image (Keller 2011: 150–1). In a similar vein, for both ilm culture and magazines, the public display of stars in ilms but also in publicity stills and posters was very much structured around building a code of glamour. Jackie Stacey’s reading of female spectatorship points to how glamour in classical Hollywood identiied beauty, success and luxury and became a marker of desire for women audience members (Stacey 1994: 151–159). This code of glamour was replicated in the opulence of movie theaters themselves as well as in the glossiness of women’s fashion magazines. They represented pathways to identify and in some cases emulate ilm stars and celebrities. Glamour is generally, although not entirely, associated with a transformation of the female body through style, makeup and a construction of allure (Dyhouse 2010). It is a form of exposure that draws attention to the individual self in an active play with public performance of pleasure and seduction – and, as Gundle’s work identiies, a symbolic transformation or applicable copyright law. of class and cultural hierarchies explicitly expressed through the visible exposure of a glamorous new self (2008). The twentieth-century construction of exposed glamour of the self populates most of the culture industries in some form or another. A long history of posters of famous women from various entertainment industries has been the lifeblood of the poster industry of the twentieth century. From the pinup girls drawn from ilm stars in the 1940s to the male and female rock icons of the 1970s and 1980s (one can think of “glam rock” as speciically cross-gendering the notion of glamour itself), the poster EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 504 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. has been a form of exploited and celebrated form of exposure of the public self. In some ways, this entire construction of public glamour reached its zenith in the 1990s in the celebration of the supermodel, where the fashion models moved well beyond their role in that industry into celebrity status itself. Modeling became enough of a form of exposure of the self to engender the attention of the public: supermodels such as Linda Evangelista, Claudia Schifer, Elle Macpherson and Kate Moss became as recognizable as any ilm or television star (see for example, Hartley 2007; Gundle 2008). Perhaps where one can see the pedagogic movement best between the celebrated constellation of images and posters and the new everyday exposure of the self is through the professional intermediaries. What has grown since the 1990s is a new form of professional photography that caters for the transformation of the individ- ual into a “star.” In Australia’s shopping centers and malls, for example, the stu- dio Starshots advertises itself as capturing “the essence of you.” The philosophy of this national franchise is outlined on its website: “so much more than perfect pho- tographs, by employing our proven formula of makeup, hairstyling and studio photo shoot with a variety of diferent looks we are able to produce the perfect glamour portraits for our clients” (Starshots 2015). Part of the “Starshot experience” is to allow the client to be “pampered” with stylists and designers, along with props and accessories, to make the experience itself as valuable as the resultant photographs. The photographs produced are in the lineage of glamour photography that natu- rally ofers the added service of touch-ups and digitally altering images to capture the “real you.” In a more everyday way, this form of photography reproduces what Weber (2009) has described as makeover television. Glamour photography is positioned at the intersection of celebrity and the cele- bration of the techniques of constructing celebrity exposure. In other words, its mar- ket is to “intermediate” one world of the everyday with another world – the extraor- dinary – via the images produced. Clients are looking for a star experience, but these companies also cater for the production of publicity stills for those aspiring to be fashion or photographic models, and at least potentially the exposure is a modern carte de visite into the media world. In its most extreme forms, glamour photogra- phy positions the female body for pornographic display: the aesthetic resembles the history of Playboy and Penthouse magazines. In its more mundane iterations, glam- our photography at the shopping mall tries for what the photographer Chris Nelson advises in his guide to glamour photography: “have it as your goal to exceed the perception she has of herself when she looks in the mirror” (Nelson 2013: 9). Other professional studios catering for the consumer market try to produce for the “family” or applicable copyright law. portrait a feeling that their photo-shoot resembles those of celebrity feature stories in magazines. Verve, another studio franchise, is expert at making their portraits distinctive and diferent in their clear appeal to the aesthetic of magazine photogra- phy. Embedded in their thinking is a combination of the portraiture of Karsh with the work of Annie Leibovitz: it is magazine cover photography for the middle class and its slogan captures this intermediary role: “art inspired by you.” Their appeal is alluring: “Each piece of Verve artwork is as individual as your family and designed to suit your home. The beautiful images captured from your photography session EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 505 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. are handcrafted into creative, original works of art” (Verve 2013). Indeed, during the family portrait session they promise that “you will reconnect to your family like never before” as the glamour and specialness of the experience draws you into a world of feeling signiicant and famed. Imagining oneself as part of the public world identiies the expansion of this sophisticated newer generation of portrait photography. It relies on the models of images in the public that circulated for most of the last century and then retools their use for a wider populace. Quite directly, this form of professional photogra- phy describes another dimension of what Graeme Turner (2010) refers to as the “demotic” as opposed to “democratic” turn in the media where increasingly the audi- ence becomes the source for media stories, as in reality television; however, in this particular case of glamour portrait photography, production is operating at a level of desire and use that rarely moves back into the larger media systems. What can be discerned from this will-to-an-image-of-fame is that it is a reliance on a “public” conception of mediated photography – a new aesthetic of what constitutes both value and beauty. Possessing that construction of value allows one’s own self to be incor- porated into the contemporary media system, albeit only for display in the family’s bedrooms and living rooms. Self-Branding Exposure: Exhibition and presentation as in goods or products. (OED, 2013) In many ways, what has been developing in the past two decades is an increasing nor- malization of exposure of the self in public. The entertainment industries have once again served as a herald for this new exposure of the self, and more than any other sector they actively developed and constructed the value of the individual’s contribu- tion to any cultural commodity. In the ilm industry, this model of self-employment, buttressed by the work of agents, followed the classical Hollywood studio era and demarcated the decline of contract players and the rise of stars and their role in organizing future ilm production (Marshall 1997: 82–6). In essence, by the 1950s, stars such as Gregory Peck, Bette Davis, or James Stewart were independent from the traditional studio model and were brought into any production on a project- by-project basis. In the past half-century, this system of production has become the norm in Hollywood, where stars are calibrated in terms of their individual value to a production and often organize payment for their contribution partially upfront or applicable copyright law. and partially as a percentage of the box oice takings. In other words, major ilm stars have made themselves into recognizable businesses as they have worked hard to “brand” themselves as a commodity that is purchased because of their capac- ity to attract the attention and patronage of audiences. Their perceived “quality” as a brand is dependent on their ability to choose appropriate projects: their pres- ence in a ilm then becomes a guarantor of quality and a very major way in which audiences can anticipate the pleasure and enjoyment they will get from a particular ilm. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 506 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Exposure of the celebrity self has been further accentuated through what is termed celebrity endorsement. Celebrities sell their own constructed value to other compa- nies to sell other products. Celebrity endorsements have had a long history and iden- tify a practice that stars and their agents adopt to give their incomes some autonomy from their primary activity. Currid-Halkett (2010) identiies this power and value of a celebrity in economic terms as a “celebrity residual”: something beyond their tal- ent cultivated in our media economy by certain personalities. This extra value of a personality is then translated into all sorts of domains, which are capitalized upon by the celebrity and in turn by the associated products. The model of association whereby celebrity residuals produce a new economy has involved enormous energies in branding the public self that have gone well beyond the original autonomy that emerged in the ilm industry more than 50 years ago. In terms of sheer exposure of celebrities, certain products have been encouraged to become highly personalized and closely associated with particular individuals, to a point where there is an indexical connotation between the product and the celebrity. For example, the image of George Clooney has been inextricably linked with Nespresso, the cofee pod system for Italian-style cofee at home, since 2006. Bus shelter advertisements as much as preilm commercials provide a ubiquity of association which maintains an image of both status and elegance that makes the product and the star indistinguishable and serves to accentuate the reputation of the star. In a similar vein, watchmakers have also made celebrities “models” of their gear (Rojek 2012: 93). Leonardo DiCaprio has been associated since 2009 with Tag Heuer, posing in several variations with the watch on his knuckles and wrist. As watches have lost their own universal value to the clock function of the ever-present mobile phone, the watch has become a form of status symbol. Watch manufacturers use celebrities as much as celebrities use the watch company to convey a mutual sense of value and prestige. The James Bond franchise – currently starring Daniel Craig – has been associated with Omega since 1995 and uses the association, as with other brands, for the notion of quality (Omega, 2015). For the star, whether Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig, it maintains a lattering image that stylistically relects a relation to quality. The branding of the public self demonstrated by these products is a kind of “static” image where the celebrity is idealized both in the formation of serious expression and depth and in the sheer quality of the image itself. It is a controlled presentation of the self that reveals only what is perceived to be the essence of beauty and, in many meanings of the word, value. This appeal to a utopian version of the self is epito- mized in the perfume industry (and by association in fashion and cosmetics more or applicable copyright law. widely) and the connection to personalities is overwhelming and ultimately highly personal. Fragrance and scent are some of the key signs of intimacy. The attachment of commercial perfumes to alluring stars moves what is intimate into a public dis- play of desire. The eyes invite the individual into their provocative though highly controlled expressions of masculinity and femininity. Moving through the perfume and cosmetics section of a department store or airport duty-free shopping precincts shows the extent of the exposure that celebrities have permitted. Modeling for Bvl- gari Man Extreme fragrance in 2013 is the internationally renowned Australia actor EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 507 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Eric Bana. Jared Leto, a minor actor and an independent music star, associates with the edgy Hugo Boss fragrance called Red that tries to connect to his own indepen- dence: the tag line draws us to this male edge with the slogan “Red means go.” Ryan Reynolds has modeled since 2009 another brand of Boss fragrance, Bottled, in classic Bond-like poses that celebrate a suit-empowered and status-illed persona, in con- trast to his generally comic screen identity (Chen 2012). The dimensions of female fragrances attempt to match the spectrum of idealized femininity and its construc- tion of fashion and glamour. Julia Roberts and Penelope Cruz look outward at us as representatives of Lancˆome, while Keira Knightley through Coco and Nicole Kid- man for No. 5 seduce us for Chanel. Dior through J’adore aligns with Charlize Theron both in fragrance and dress, while Beyonc´e has given her cachet to the True Star fra- grance of American clothing brand Tommy Hiliger, a division of Est´ee Lauder. The list of fashion/cosmetic/fragrance connections to recognizable stars is very long and highly personal and beyond Photoshop in their depiction of ideal selves (see Kubartz 2011). Beyond their perfection and control, these images point to the celebration of the branded self. When one begins to explore our contemporary world through shop- ping malls, city centers and downtowns, and through public transport, these pub- lic images of famous people are literally ubiquitous in their larger-than-life poses and in their placement of images on every surface imaginable. Augmenting these images are the thousands of model images attached to products, and what we see is an overwhelming display of the public self (igure 27.1). This has become an accept- able dimension of exposure of the self for it underlines the inherent value and the capacity of the individual to draw attention. The celebrity exposure through product endorsements has to be seen then as leading a culture towards a legitimate exposure of the self and an accentuation that recognition is the marker of contemporary value. The earnings of any of the public igures attached to perfumes is incredible and rep- resents a marker of their “value.” For instance Nicole Kidman earned $4 million per year for a three year global TV and print campaign for Chanel in 2006 and these igures of millions are associated with most celebrities involved in perfumes (CBS News 2006) (Beltrone 2014). The level of exposure of public personalities has provided at least a model for the organization of the self more widely. The recognition culture that operates as a form of economic value in this wider culture industry is similarly the model through which the populace begins to calibrate their own value. The branding of the self through exposure its into the contemporary work world where employment has become much more temporary (the average job tenure in the US was 4.6 years in or applicable copyright law. 2014; Bureau of Labor Statistics 2014) and much more contingent (according to recent surveys workers expect to be employed at their current job for less than three years) (Meister 2012). Greater portions of the labor market are employed on short- term contracts; this places an obligation on the individual to build a portfolio of experiences and jobs that resemble the way an actor builds their career from role to role. Increasingly, portfolios presenting the work identity and the recognition of past work are now the way that future work can be best guaranteed. The collective workforce is being individualized through the necessity to sell oneself. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 508 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Figure 27.1 Hair dye models’ idealized selie-like poses on supermarket shelves Exposure has become one of the norms of contemporary culture speciically because it is connected to economic value and self-worth. Online culture perhaps best expresses the comfort with which people now expose themselves and brand their identities. Facebook, Skype, Instagram, Tumblr, Twitter, and many other forms of social media invite users to complete their proile through uploading their pic- ture. Many play with this identity construction by providing avatars, drawn or false images; but vastly more upload what they perceive as a good representation of them- selves. Facebook and Twitter proile images are populated with smiling people in happy settings or in poses that express how they want others to perceive them. Although these self-photos for proiles are rarely as beautifully constructed as those or applicable copyright law. of the celebrities used to endorse products, they are chosen with consideration and care and they mean something. When they are changed for new photos, there is usually an attempt to capture some aspect of the self – humor, seriousness, pro- fessionalism – and the exposed self provides something of a match to the public identity that the individual wants to inhabit. The exposure then is matched with the written proile provided of schools and positions, along with likes and dislikes, and these become the formations of the constructed and branded contemporary self. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 509 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Paparazzi and Risk Exposure: Revealing publicly / Indecent exposure/scandal; as in a Dangerous Asset. (OED, 2013) The constructed images of celebrity endorsements represent the controlled and desirable form of exposure in contemporary culture in its capacity to present the best possible image, but in a world of billions of cameras and numerous possibili- ties of distribution the capacity to control what kind of “proile” of ourselves is pub- licly available entails risks. Two of the deinitional variations of exposure identify the dangers of “revealing publicly” and link the practice with both “indecency” and “scandal.” Embedded in the deinition of exposure is a normative sensibility around propriety in what forms of revelation of the self are permissible. Scandal and indecency identify the unintentional movement of the private into the public and sometimes the political. Once again this domain of activity has been the province of celebrity media coverage for more than a century and provides the frame of how this relationship to the negative aspects of exposure is negotiated as part of a public life. What appears to be a straightforward position – that is, one where the celebrity controls their image and this becomes the ideal – does not necessarily make sense in a culture where recognition and attention provide evident economic and other forms of value. Lull and Hinerman claim that “the media scandal disturbs the conventional distinction made between guilt and shame.” In its exposure of the private to the public, “the media scandal disembeds human actions and recontex- tualizes them into far-reaching, symbolic realities” (1997: 26). Thompson’s work on political scandal identiies the implications of mediatization and its technologies in the production of a new level of public visibility (2000). News media generally are complicit in the production of scandal and the technological capacity of new media to “reveal” and to “expose” is an essential part of its business of creating what can be described as discursive sensations. Ponce de Leon’s history of twentieth-century American “human interest” journalism points to the emergence in the 1920s of gos- sip columnists such as Walter Winchell and their associated pictures of the pantheon of the famous as critical to the development of both positive and negative stories about celebrities as a way to construct a kind of gossip news report of recognizable people (2002: 53–4). In other words, scandal and gossip were not only ways of pro- ducing news events, they were also sometimes the manner in which attention on a particular celebrity could be maintained for the advantage of the celebrity. Negative or applicable copyright law. news as much as, and sometimes more than, positive news still attracts the attention of the camera to the individual. Over the course of the twentieth century, photography by paparazzi, an entirely new profession and industry of photography, developed around the possibility of exposing the famous. Sometimes indecently and sometimes favorably, but always with the intention of linking the captured uniqueness of the image to the lows of an attention economy fueled by the media and its economic imperatives, these pho- tographers worked the new exigencies of the attention economy. The term paparazzi EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 510 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. is derived from the name of the photographer Paparazzo in Fellini’s ilm La Dolce Vita and his activities in capturing images. Camping out and stalking were elemen- tal to the trade of paparazzi as they worked to expose celebrities when they least expected it (Fossard forthcoming). The paparazzis’ objective was to engage with the activity that Dyer described as critical to the relationship between the audience and the star: to reveal or expose the “real” person behind the celebrity persona (1998: 23–4). The industry has been driven by freelance work by individuals and pathways to publications provided by photo agencies. Australian photographer Darren Lyons’s description of his seminal moment in the industry typiies its structure: My irst experience with the royals was right after I arrived in London: I covered Prince William’s irst day at school. There were about 150 photographers there in the morning and everyone shot the proceedings, but I hung around at the back door for the rest of the day and got a shot of the young prince leaving for home. I was the only photographer to get something that was informal and natural and it was my irst exclusive. I sold the picture to he Express, who paid me £75 for it – at that point I had no idea how to negotiate. They used it big and then I took it to an agency, Rex Features, who syndicated it for me … (2009: 26) Through their images, paparazzi developed into a trade that challenged all sorts of conventions related to private and public space. The photographers themselves are sometimes viliied for their eforts but also are seen as a kind of vanguard of journalism in their push to complete exposure and disclosure of the rich, power- ful, and famous, where the potential for their fall is made visible (for example, see Mendelson 2007). McNamara’s work has explored these dimensions between celebri- ties’ control of their images and spaces and those of the paparazzi (2005). The battles over control of images have often pitted stars against publishers and presented deeply contested challenges to intellectual property. In McNamara’s more recent work, she has investigated the new economies of paparazzi photography. In that study, what is interesting in terms of our culture of exposure is that McNamara identiies that more “candid” images are circulating through online culture as international photo agencies (such as Getty Images) now appropriate images from a wider range of pro- fessional and amateur digital image production (2011: 518). In conjunction with the work of amateurs, professional photographers have worked with more sophisticated and truly penetrating telephoto technology to capture the hidden worlds of celebri- ties. The combination of the invasive activity of the most adept paparazzi with the work of amateurs presents an entire world of surveillance for high proile contempo- or applicable copyright law. rary celebrities. An array of images of quite varying quality now populate celebrity- inspired magazines (igure 27.2) and through their cover iconography are meant to look as if they are out of control, expressing this as a predominant connotation (igure 27.3). At the very extreme end of exposure are the celebrity pornography sites. The images collected of the most famous stars are an interesting m´elange of what appear to be authentic images of nude or seminude performances alongside digitally altered nude and sexually explicit versions. The risk of fame and publicity is that one’s image EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 511 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law. Figure 27.2 The celebrity magazine rack: out of control can be altered completely. The precursors of this redeployment of images were in magazines such as Celebrity Skin or Celebrity Sleuth: these earlier conigurations of nude or partially nude images presented them as authentic, whether through the work derived from the probing paparazzi telephoto lens, isolation of a nude moment in a ilm, or the inadvertent leak of illicit photos before celebrities were famous (Knee 2006). Currently, celebrity fakes are acknowledged very clearly as fabricated, partially EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 512 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Figure 27.3 The chaos aesthetic of the celebrity magazine cover to avoid litigation. Nonetheless, the celebrity fake porn image is everywhere and cap- tures every famous person. At the same time as debates in 2013 proliferated about Miley Cyrus’s highly constructed and popular video where she appeared carefully nude on a wrecking ball or twerking at the VM Awards with Robyn Thicke, there were many (digitally altered) photos on a number of websites that exposed much more of the performer in what can only be described as hard-core pornographic poses. In this world of image exposure, the attention economy produces all sorts of associated residual values that can only be arrested through an appeal to privacy and or applicable copyright law. intellectual property laws. As exposure has become even more generalized in contemporary culture, celebrity negotiation with this out-of-control marketplace of images can be clearly identiied as the herald of how photographs populate social media networks in everyday life. The risks that celebrities deal with – that an image that appears to be harmful in terms of content could also be a source of both attention and value – are exactly what is explored via Instagram, Snapchat and Facebook. Moral panics are emerging around the control of this level of exposure, and they are particularly focused on EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 513 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. youth culture. “Sexting” – the exchange of sexually explicit images of oneself, usu- ally through mobile devices –represents an extreme form of exposure and the most extreme form of attracting attention, as well as perhaps the greatest recent moral panic in spite of much less evidence of its prevalence (Mitchell et al. 2012). Sites have manifested themselves where the nude selie is collected from willing partici- pants intent on their image being “liked” in a new competitive and comparative game of recognition and attention-seeking. On a much more mundane level is the use of Facebook as an archive for photos. Walls on Facebook are populated with an array of images that – particularly in youth culture, but also more broadly – are often per- ceived as harmless in their expos´e of a particular night out by an individual; however, this form of publicity is not necessarily limited to friends and families. The risk of exposure in contemporary culture has produced a series of panics that regularly pop- ulate journalistic reports. For example, 31 percent of American university and col- lege admission oicers surveyed in 2013 by a company preparing students for college entry tests used Facebook and Google to screen applicants. The same survey found that oicers reported a 5 percent decline from 2012 to 2013 (from 35 to 30 percent) in discovering negative information about an applicant (Kaplan 2013; Urist 2013). Sim- ilar reports and fears have circulated as employers have used personal Facebook sites of potential employees to determine their suitability. These developments in combi- nation underline the potential risk as well as the growing eforts of youth to cover up the visibility and searchability of risky or what may be perceived as scandalous behavior. Whether from the perspective of the celebrity or the wider online culture, expo- sure entails risks. The risks can be deined in economic terms as one of the original deinitions of exposure identiies that exposure means an association with “danger- ous assets.” The desire for recognition and the capacity to produce, exhibit, and trans- form images in contemporary culture draw us into a culture of potential exposure that always has the potential to no longer produce a positive “residual” value for the self. Conclusion – Specularity Exposure: Subjected to an external inluence. (OED, 2013) “Subjected to an external inluence” is one of the deinitions of exposure. The examples given in the Oxford dictionary refer to how heat or cold or, in a more or applicable copyright law. general sense, the elements impact on the individual: one is exposed to climatic extremes from which the body, without some form of protection, is at risk of damage or even death. This meaning of exposure, although perhaps overly dra- matic, best summarizes the cultural transformation that this chapter has both identiied and investigated through the various related deinitions of exposure. As explored through the technological dimensions of photography, the contem- porary moment has allowed a surplus economy of exposures of the self and a normalization of the distribution of our image widely through social networks. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 514 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. In a very real sense, this culture of exposure has externalized our identiication and our understanding of contemporary value. Deeply embedded in this personal exposure regime is an identiicatory trope derived from more than a century of celebrity culture and its production of images, attention, and recognition. Our self- identity is externally structured by the values of attraction, attention and recogni- tion that have been promulgated through the media of fame, visibility and repu- tation. The celebrity industry developed into a culture of self-branding and self- commodiication and what we have witnessed in the last decade is the expan- sion of the exigencies of branding the self and making one’s activities visible and noticeable. In previous work, I have developed the concept of presentational media to describe the way in which online culture has provided this focus on the self as the agent in the production and dissemination of media and communication (Mar- shall 2010a; 2014: 160–1). What needs to be added to this concept is that there are a myriad of external pressures associated with its agency. For example, the use of any social network online generates information about the self as the con- tent moves into a liminal world of ownership. Despite privacy settings, the con- tent itself is both in the private world of the user and the private property of the social network company. What this resembles is exactly the liminal state of celebrities. The work of celebrities is usually associated with speciic cultural com- modities that have their own property into which their value has been appropri- ated, at the same time as celebrities actively develop their own brand and prop- erty. The celebrity public self as much as this wider public version of ourselves in online culture is subjected to – and surrounded by – this external economy and the level of agency of the self is constrained by these external forces and inlu- ences. In online culture, the industry aggregates all the exposed information we provide, and this allows it to generate tailored announcements and advertisements that intersect with our interests and desires. In addition, it ostensibly has control of the content we have uploaded if it is needed for other forms of aggregation. In celebrity culture, aggregation is diferently constituted but is generally in terms of the size of the attracted audience that the celebrity can generate and this aggre- gation determines the economic power of the celebrity in future possible cultural production. When compiling these external inluences, what we can see in this broadened expanse of the public self there is a process of internalization of value and of risk. Like the star preparing for their public performance, we look into the mirror and deter- mine whether what we are exposing makes sense and has the appropriate impact and or applicable copyright law. efect and acceptable level of risk. The internalization process has expanded as the level of public exposure has grown exponentially: we look at the mirror as if others are looking at us, following us, trying to be our friend in our social networked space, continuously and relentlessly. The specularity of contemporary culture (Marshall 2010b) is the new panopticon, as the gap between the former public world and our own internal world narrows. Celebrity becomes more than just a show and provider of points of identiication; celebrity provides the guide for the contemporary condi- tion of exposure of the self. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 515 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. References Barthes, R. (2010) Camera Lucida: Relections on Photography. New York: Hill & Wang. Barthes, R. and Heath, S. (1988) Image, Music, Text. New York: Noonday Press. Bourdieu, P. and Boltanski, L. (1990) Photography: A Middle-Brow Art. Cambridge: Polity. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014) “Employee tenure in 2014.” US Department of Labor, Sept. 18, at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/tenure.pdf (accessed Apr. 2015). Checefsky, B. (2008) “Photography and desire: fashion, glamour and pornography.” In M. R. Peres (ed.), he Concise Focal Encyclopedia of Photography: From the First Photo on Paper to the Digital Revolution (pp. 84–93). Burlington, MA: Focal Press. Chen, J. (2012) “Tastemaker: Ryan Reynolds.” Details, June 1, at http://www.details. com/fashion-style/grooming/201206/ryan-reynolds-workout-secrets-grooming (accessed Apr. 2015). Cohan, P. (2011) “How success killed Eastman Kodak.” Forbes, Oct. 1, at http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2011/10/01/how-success-killed-eastman- kodak/ (accessed Apr. 2015). Crook, J. (2013) “Snapchat sees more daily photos than Facebook.” TechCrunch, Nov. 19, at http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/19/snapchat-reportedly-sees-more-daily- photos-than-facebook/ (accessed Apr. 2015). Currid-Halkett, E. (2010) Starstruck: he Business of Celebrity. New York: Faber & Faber. Day, E. (2013) “How selies became a global phenomenon.” he Guardian/Observer online, July 14, at http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/14/how-selies-became-a- global-phenomenon (accessed Apr. 2015). Dyer, R. (1998) Stars. New edn. London: British Film Institute. Dyhouse, C. (2010) Glamour: Women, History, Feminism. London: Zed Books. Fiegerman, S. (2013) “No, Snapchat hasn’t passed Facebook in daily photos shared (yet).” Mashable, Nov. 19, at http://mashable.com/2013/11/19/snapchat-facebook-daily- photos/ (accessed Apr. 2015). Fossard, A. (forthcoming) Paparazzi a` l’´ecran: quels personnage?! Le paparazzi au cin´ema et dans la s´erie t´el´e. Bordeaux: Bord de l’Eau. Garner, G. (2008) “Photography and society in the 20th century.” In M. R. Peres (ed.), he Concise Focal Encyclopedia of Photography: From the First Photo on Paper to the Digital Revolution (pp. 71–84). Burlington, MA: Focal Press. Gundle, S. (2008) Glamour: A History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hartley, J. (2007) “Documenting Kate Moss.” Journalism Studies 8 (4): 555–65. doi:10.1080/14616700701411979. Hearn, A. (2013) “‘Sentimental “greenbacks” of civilization’: cartes de visite and the pre- history of self-branding.” In M. P. McAllister and E. West (eds), he Routledge Com- panion to Advertising and Promotional Culture (pp. 24–38). New York: Routledge. Howells, R. (2011) “Heroes, saints and celebrities: the photograph as holy relic.” Celebrity or applicable copyright law. Studies 2 (2): 112–30. doi:10.1080/19392397.2011.574866. Instagram (2015) Press page. At http://instagram.com/press/# (accessed May 2015). Kaplan (2013) “Kaplan Test Prep survey: more college admission oicers checking appli- cants’ digital trails.” Kaplan Test Prep, Oct. 31, at http://press.kaptest.com/press- releases/kaplan-test-prep-survey-more-college-admissions-oicers-checking- applicants-digital-trails-but-most-students-unconcerned (accessed Apr. 2015). Keller, U. (2011) “Early photojournalism.” In D. Crowley and P. Heyer (eds), Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society, 6th edn (pp. 144–52). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin 516 P. David Marshall Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Kember, S. (2012) “Ubiquitous photography.” Philosophy of Photography 3 (2): 331–48. doi:10.1386/pop.3.2.331_1. Knee, A. (2006) “Celebrity skins: the illicit textuality of the celebrity nude magazine.” In S. Holmes and S. Redmond (eds), Framing Celebrity (pp. 161–76). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Kubartz, B. (2011) “Sensing brands, branding scents: on perfume creation in the fragrance industry.” In A. Pike (ed.), Brands and Branding Geographies (pp. 125–49). Chel- tenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Kuhn, A. (1995) Family Secrets: Acts of Memory and Imagination. London: Verso. Lothrop, E. S. (1978) “The Brownie camera.” History of Photography 2 (1): 1–10. doi:10.1080/03087298.1978.10442948. Lull, J. and Hinerman, S. (eds) (1997) Media Scandals: Morality and Desire in the Popular Culture Marketplace. Cambridge: Polity. Lyons, D. (2009) Mr Paparazzi. London: John Blake. Marshall, P. D. (1997) Celebrity and Power: Fame in Contemporary Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Marshall, P. D. (2010a) “The promotion and presentation of the self: celebrity as marker of presentational media.” Celebrity Studies 1 (1): 35–48. doi:10.1080/19392390903519057. Marshall, P. D. (2010b) “The specular economy.” Society 47 (6): 498–502. doi:10.1007/s12115- 010-9368-5. Marshall, P. D. (2014) “Persona studies: mapping the proliferation of the public self.” Journal- ism 15 (2): 153–70. doi:10.1177/1464884913488720. McNamara, K. (2005) “On location: celebrity and space.” PhD thesis, University of Sydney. McNamara, K. (2011) “The paparazzi industry and new media: the evolving production and consumption of celebrity news and gossip websites.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 14 (5): 515–30. doi:10.1177/1367877910394567. Meister, J. (2012) “Job hopping is the ‘new normal’ for millennials.” Forbes, Aug. 14, at http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeannemeister/2012/08/14/job-hopping-is-the- new-normal-for-millennials-three-ways-to-prevent-a-human-resource-nightmare/ (accessed Apr. 2015). Mendelson, A. L. (2007) “On the function of the United States paparazzi: mosquito swarm or watchdogs of celebrity image control and power.” Visual Studies 22 (2): 169–83. doi:10.1080/14725860701507230. Michel, F. (2015) “How many public photos are uploaded to Flickr every day, month, year?” At http://www.lickr.com/photos/franckmichel/6855169886/ (accessed Apr. 2015). Mitchell, K. J., Finkelhor, D., Jones, L. M., and Wolak, J. (2012) “Prevalence and characteristics of youth sexting: a national study.” Pediatrics 129 (1): 13–20. doi:10.1542/peds.2011- 1730. Nelson, C. (2013) Creating Stylish and Sexy hotography: A Guide to Glamour Portraiture. Bufalo, NY: Amherst Media. or applicable copyright law. Omega (2015) “Omega and Bond.” http://www.omegawatches.com/planet-omega/ cinema/omega-and-bond (accessed Apr. 2015). Peres, M. R. (2008) he Concise Focal Encyclopedia of Photography: From the First Photo on Paper to the Digital Revolution. Burlington, MA: Focal Press. Perich, S. T. (2011) he Changing Face of Portrait Photography: From Daguerreotype to Digital. Washington, DC: National Museum of American History. Ponce de Leon, C. L. (2002) Self-Exposure: Human-Interest Journalism and the Emergence of Celebrity in America, 1890–1940. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Exposure 517 Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. Robertson, A. (2013) “Facebook users have uploaded a quarter-trillion photos since the site’s launch.” The Verge, Sept. 17, at http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/17/4741332/facebook- users-have-uploaded-a-quarter-trillion-photos-since-launch (accessed Apr. 2015). Rojek, C. (2012) Fame Attack: he Inlation of Celebrity and Its Consequences. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Shontell, A. (2014) “5 months after turning down billions, Snapchat’s growth is still exploding with 700 million photos shared per day.” Business Insider, May 2, at http://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-growth-2014-5 (accessed May 2015). Smith, C. (2013) “EXCLUSIVE: Snapchat users are sending 400 million ‘snaps’ daily, edging past Facebook’s photo upload volume.” Business Insider Australia, Nov. 20, at http://www.businessinsider.com.au/snapchat-edges-past-facebook-in-photos-2013- 11 (accessed Apr. 2015). Smith, C. (2015) “By the numbers: 25 amazing Vine statistics.” Mobile Marketing, Apr. 3, at http://expandedramblings.com/index.php/vine-statistics/ (accessed May 2015). Stacey, J. (1994) Star Gazing: Hollywood Cinema and Female Spectatorship. London: Routledge. Staiger, J. (1991) “Seeing stars.” In C. Gledhill (ed.), Stardom: Industry of Desire (pp. 3–16). London: Routledge. Starshots (2015) “About us.” At http://www.starshots.com.au/aboutus.php (accessed Apr. 2015). Thompson, J. B. (2000) Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age. Cam- bridge: Polity. Turner, G. (2010) Ordinary People and the Media: he Demotic Turn. Los Angeles: Sage. Urist, J. (2013) “Application angst: teens’ social media can hurt college chances.” Today, Nov. 25, at http://www.today.com/moms/application-angst-teens-social-media-could-hurt- college-chances-2D11641782 (accessed Apr. 2015). van Dijck, J. (2008) “Digital photography: communication, identity, memory.” Visual Com- munication 7 (1): 57–76. doi:10.1177/1470357207084865. Verve (2013) “Verve portraits.” Formerly at http://verveportraits.com.au/range/. Wagner, K. (2013) “Facebook has more than a quarter of a trillion user photos.” Mashable, Sept. 17, at http://mashable.com/2013/09/16/facebook-photo-uploads/ (accessed Apr. 2015). Weber, B. R. (2009) Makeover TV: Selhood, Citizenship, and Celebrity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. YouTube (2015) “Statistics.” At http://www.youtube.com/yt/press/en-GB/statistics.html (accessed Apr. 2015). or applicable copyright law. EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity Account: deakin Copyright © 2015. Wiley-Blackwell. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law. Account: deakin AN: 1081522 ; Redmond, Sean, Marshall, P. David.; A Companion to Celebrity EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/15/2015 6:31 PM via DEAKIN UNIV LIBRARY