Why not? "Known actors" attract interest to a show in a crowded media environment. This contributes directly to the money investors earn. Furthermore, "known actors" put their reputation on the line for every show. A string of bombs will kill an actors career no matter how talented. Furthermore, "unknown actors" need the role more than the makers need them in particular. So "unknown actors" have an incentive to reduce their price so they have a chance to become "known actors"
Given these factors "known actors" definitely deserve more than "unknown actors".
You have stated something I learned long ago in the entertainment business:
"It's not fair, and don't waste energy expecting it to be"
It also extends to the governance-entertainment industry. "Not fair"
So if people don't want to see a woman read the news, only legislation will force broadcasters to be "broad" casters. "Not fair". And if some dude (Louis CK, Patrick Brown) is slightly implicated in something distasteful, people don't want to see their mugs anymore and they're gone. Due process has nothing to do with it "Not fair"
This is mass communication, which is the opposite of public engagement.
Home
Contact
Login
Register