BuzzFoto Blind Item
This underage female star from a children’s network (not Disney) made the mistake of taking questionable photos of herself on her cellphone to send to a male coworker. Someone on set found them on her found after snooping through her cell, and decided to turn her in. When he turned her in to one of the execs, the exec fired the employee promptly for snooping. The fired employee thinks the photos were taken for the exec because of his reaction.
Corey Feldman needs to talk! Spill the beans Corey!!
ReplyDeleteBuzzFoto items are so general. That situation has happened to so many young stars, whether Disney or else. Spears' little sister, Hudgens, etc. Unfortunately, as Corey Feldman had truly stated before, and Enty had supported, the problem with Hollywood is pedophiles.
ReplyDeleteUnless he knew who she was sending him to, he has no idea if it was the exec.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, that IS snooping. And if she is underage, why not tell the parents, not her boss?
uh uh--my first thought upon reading this was "fire the snooper!" I mean, no one has the right to look through the pics on your phone, come ON, so of COURSE he/she should be fired. That does not impugn the exec, in my opinion.
ReplyDeletei'm with the exec because the fired employee did fun with pix found on the underage star's phone
ReplyDeleteall of them?
ReplyDeletei get the scandal is supposed to be that they were for the exec but that's making a huge assumption. dude just got fired, of course he'd be a little scornful towards the exec. its easier to say he was involved and got mad than admit maybe he just shouldn't have been all up in her phone.
Good! the snooper deserves to be fired.
ReplyDeleteI'm with the "fire the snooper" comments. Little wretch has no business in anyone's personal possessions.
ReplyDeleteSnooper went through a young co-worker's cellphone at work.
ReplyDeleteSnooper found some incriminating photos in the course of snooping.
(There's no factual basis for the statement that the photos were taken "to send to a male co-worker.")
Snooper ratted out the person he snooped to their mutual employer.
Snooper got fired for snooping.
Fired Snooper is now sliming the exec who fired him or her and doubling down on sliming the person s/he snooped.
Snooper's rumormongering is not credible given these facts.
The existence of pedophiles in Hollywood (really? this is news?) does not support concluding that pedophilia occurred here and was covered up by firing Snooper.
Snooping isn't good, although technically he could have gone to the police, since there have been cases of underage girls being charged for such things (doubt it would stick with it being a star, but still).
ReplyDeleteI am going to guess that it's someone like Dakota Fanning or similar.
What if child actress left the phone somewhere general, such as in food services or in wardrobe/makeup area, and the employee checked the phone to figure out who to return it to and saw the photo on screen?
ReplyDeleteI would think the person wanted the exec to know so that child actress could be warned about dangers of nudie pix getting you fire if you're a child star on a wholesome show when a hacker gets them.
They actually should involve the police. It probably wouldn't solve anything but "whoever it is" may get more careful in the future, which isn't necessarily a good thing.
ReplyDeleteMark B said...
ReplyDelete"Snooping isn't good, although technically he could have gone to the police, since there have been cases of underage girls being charged for such things (doubt it would stick with it being a star, but still)."
What underage girl has been charged with *taking* a picture of yourself? There's nothing to suggest the "incriminating" pics were posted anywhere.
Teenagers charged for sending nude pictures of themselves to each other.
ReplyDeleteIt does happen.
http://www.wpxi.com/news/18469160/detail.html#-
I'm on Team Anna; next step -- employee tells exec in case child's parents might *not mind* as in future Lohans and expose the show/film to serious problems.
ReplyDelete