Friday, April 22, 2011

Should entertainers and sport stars be paid such large sums of money? What are your views?

Should entertainers and sport stars be paid such large sums of money? What are your views?

10 to 15 million. That is the amount which famous Asian star Jackie Chan is paid per movie. In the two years 1997 and 1998, basketball star Michael Jordan was paid $33,140,000 each year. These astronomical figures reflect the high “salaries” celebrities and sports stars are paid. But should they really be paid so much?

Firstly, celebrities and sports stars are paid so much only because their audiences pay so much to see them. If the audiences decide not to give anything, what could they do? For example, movie star Lindsay Lohan was convicted and jailed multiple times. During her jail time, was she paid? No. If a sports star snaps a tendon, will anyone want to pay to see him? No. The large amount of revenue from say, DVDs and shows, largely go to the entertainers and sports stars because they are the ones who make their respective fields so interesting.

Secondly, the entertainers and sports stars are of high demand. They are each unique because of say, their brilliant acting skills or their excellent soccer stunts. Thus, to get them, producers or clubs pay good money because they would increase a show’s popularity or increase a club’s prowess. Also, because celebrities cannot do a show alone, and thus they need make-up artists and so on, they provide more jobs. Also, for the sports stars, they need nutritionists, etc. Thus, they deserve the large amounts of money there are receiving.

Thirdly, these entertainers and sports stars have to handle great pressure. Their job is not as easy as it seems. People think they have it easy, as they earned huge amounts of money for kicking a ball around or reciting from a script. For one, they have to deal with the huge crowd milling around them wherever they go. And they also have to mind what they do, as they are closely scrutinized by the public. If they walk into a hotel with friends of the opposite sex, there would probably be a scandal in the tabloids in the next day. This, thus, is the pressure these people have to face. Thus, they deserve the huge sums they are getting.

However, one cannot deny that even though these entertainers and sportspeople are among the elite, there are other elites in other fields. Hundreds of people apply to be US Navy SEALS each year, yet only a few make it. Why do they not get huge sums too? Consider this: thousands of people apply to get a three-line part in a movie, and only one can make it. Considering this success rate for such a small role, how many would then go on to be movie stars? Thus, these entertainers and sports stars are definitely the best of the best.

Ultimately, the high amount of money paid to these celebrated entertainers and sports stars is well-deserved by them, as they provide a large amount of entertainment, for without them, a lot of fun in life would be absent.

Word count(excluding title): 498

4 comments:

  1. I believe this is a very good piece of essay, especially your title with all the examples given, though you could have given a more firm thesis statement. Secondly, I feel that your second body paragraph is rather irrelevant. The first part of the paragraph is almost the same as the first body paragraph while your second part is a little off point. How would them being paid more allow for more jobs? Lastly, I believe your conclusion can also be further improved to match your introduction as a one-sentence conclusion would not provide as much insight for the reader, which is very important for expository essays.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The expository essay starts off with statistics about how much money certain famous celebrities are paid. This is a good way to capture the reader's attention. However, the thesis is not exactly very clearly stated in the opening paragraph. Do you actually agree or disagree?

    The body paragraphs are well organized, and they are also not irrelevant, except for the second one. The point itself is alright, but the evidence and elaboration is unclear.

    ReplyDelete