Paparazzi stalking of Harry and Meghan has exposed job crisis

This event was not history repeating itself but a harbinger of the future of our economy as technology continually changes the nature of our jobs. It was a reflection of how much the world has evolved for the paparazzi – and for all of us – not just how it has remained in the 25 years since Princess Di’s death.

Technology has destroyed the economics of celebrity pictures. And the fact that being followed and harassed by the press isn’t as common these days doesn’t make it worth it to photographers. Harry and Meghan, far from representing an ongoing problem, were an unfortunate exception.

A few years ago when I was researching my last book, I spent a lot of time with the paparazzi in New York City. I went on several stakeouts with him.

Most of the time, it was pretty boring. We’d wait hours for a glimpse of Gigi Hadid to leave her apartment. But when she appeared, we all felt a rush of adrenaline.

As we waited for those few seconds, the seasoned paparazzi would tell me about the old days. He spoke fondly of the “golden age” that began in the 1990s, when glossy magazines paid large royalties to photographers for exclusive photos of celebrities.

It all came to a head in the days following, at which time Britney Spears famously attacked the paparazzi with an umbrella. At the time, a photograph of a celebrity drinking coffee or pumping gas could fetch a photographer $10,000 to $20,000. And because the prizes were much higher, celebrity brawls and car chases were more common and often in the news.

But that market collapsed after 2008. First, it was because people stopped buying glossy magazines during the recession, instead perusing celebrity content online for free. Meanwhile, like many other industries, photo agents (intermediaries between magazines and periodicals) consolidated into only a few players who commanded more market power over the paparazzi. Demand for more photos from media websites increased. Agents, looking for a more stable and higher income, turned to a subscription model instead of paying per picture. The result was paparazzi getting maybe $10 or $20 for a photo that fetched $10,000 or $20,000.

Many paparazzi packed up their cameras and found something else to do.

Today, some photos—at least for the most elusive celebrities doing something interesting—can still fetch a big paycheck.

But celebrities often undermine the media by posting the big money shots — a new baby or a breakup — on social media. That’s why celebrity car chases are so rare today, and when they do happen they’re even more dramatic. Harry and Meghan are among those who can still bring in a payday, although it’s still not nearly as many as it used to be.

It is too easy to see photographers as vultures intruding into private lives to make money. But really, they’re just the bottom rung of a larger ecosystem that benefits many different people, including the celebrities themselves and their fans who find photos of celebrities online.

Paparazzi face the same challenges in a changing economy as people in other professions. Technology is changing how we all make a living, most industries are consolidating into a few large firms, and these changes mean that some jobs are no longer viable. The paparazzo left after 25 years in the business because he could no longer support his family.

It’s the price of progress, but it can be sad for those going through it because it means something has been lost. Our culture changes and the jobs that were the basis of a community no longer exist. This is true even in businesses we don’t often think about.

Former photo editor for US Weekly, Peter Grossman, once told me, “What is our culture if everything we see is carefully curated by the makers of it?”

Harry and Meghan have a cold relationship with the paparazzi and are trying to change the industry. But in many ways it is unnecessary. The market is already doing that for them.

Allison Schrager is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering economics.

Updated: May 23, 2023, 11:45 PM IST