However, this documentary also talks about the reasons why paparazzi have chosen this job, and also the historical view about the creation of this new kind of photographers. In general, in the documentary there are three main arguments discussed. The first one is celebrities are constantly exposed, and they don't have any private life. The second one is celebrities rely on the paparazzi to stay famous and because of this relation celebrities have to accept paparazzi, for they work as serious as they do. The third one is the consumer is at fault for both the paparazzi' greed and the celebrities' lack of privacy. The most logical and effective argument in this documentary is the one I'm going to analyze in this essay.
Next I'm going to talk about the strengths and weaknesses of the argument. The first strength is the use of ethos, on other words like how Aristotle defined it "ethical appeal", for if someone else tried to talk about the problems that the celebrities faced with paparazzi, we the audience, wouldn't even care, but when the celebrities are talking about their hardship and sufferings, we emphasize with them, and we believe in them. It's one of the strongest arguments in this documentary because most of people respect celebrities and listen to what they have to say. However, before becoming celebrities they knew what was waiting for them, and they knew what to expect from fame, so they must deal with the consequences of becoming famous and try to co-live with it. The next effective argument is the use of pathos, and I can catch it easily while watching the documentary. For example, when Sarah Jessica Parker talked about the story of when she was pregnant and was purchased by the paparazzi, this was very sad and scary, and it is not forgivable for any reason. This is a very strong argument because me as person and a human beings I can't tolerate this act, so it affected me and it showed me the dangers of paparazzi and the madness of their work.