Surfers Attack Photographer Over Matthew McConaughey

MALIBU, Calif. — A paparazzo trying to photograph Matthew McConaughey at the beach told police he was attacked by a mob of surfers who threw his camera in the ocean.

The 29-year-old photojournalist told sheriff's deputies that a large group of surfers near Paradise Cove in Malibu approached him and other paparazzi about 2 p.m. Saturday and demanded the group stop taking pictures and filming.

"There was apparently a fight, and the photographer gave a statement that he received injuries," Los Angeles County sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore said Sunday. Detectives are investigating, he said.

McConaughey was not involved in the attack, authorities said.

A call to McConaughey's publicist was not immediately returned.

The celebrity Web site TMZ.com posted a video Sunday showing about a dozen young men in swimsuits approaching what appears to be a group of paparazzi and yelling and swearing at them.

A scuffle breaks out after one of the photographers exchanges insults with the group and at first refuses their orders to leave.

"I'll give you a thousand bucks if you leave right now," one of the young men in swimsuits tells the photographers.

Another shoves a photographer filming the scene, and still another says, "We'll draw a line in the beach, and we'll fight for the beach. If you guys win, you can have the beach."

When one member of the group shouts at a photographer, "Get a ... real job," the photographer replies, "This is a real job. What do you do?"

The man replies: "I just drink beer and party."

Comments

[shadow322]

GOOD FOR THE SURFERS! The paparazzi have to be stopped. Didn't we learn anything from the death of Princess Di? We see them on the news constantly acting like a mob. There is nothing in what I have seen that represents freedom of the press. We need to legislate a barrier distance for anyone taking a photograph for sale. We would not tolerate this for one minute. Why do we expect someone else to tolerate this?

[mathme]

Yeah, the paps were about ready to pull out their sticks and hound MM on the waves... who knows? They could have run him into a pier.

I think that paps suck, don't get me wrong, they take little more than snapshots (uninteresting composition, no real meaning, poor lighting) of people doing mundane things in an obtrusive manner. However, I also can't stand people who strive to be famous and then get pissed off at people for treating them like they're famous.

[FZliveson]

By the way... I am NOT inferring that Frank (Zappa) is/was/or ever will be God Almighty.
I am saying that he would have puked to see the "bad words filter" verbiage show up when my previously attempted but then rejected comment was made. Frank Zappa was brilliant but not God.

[FZliveson]

Woweee I just had a comment removed by a "bad words filter."
God almighty, Frank (Zappa) even the "liberated" Huffington Post
STILL thinks that graphic words are somehow profane, when the
topic the word was being used to respond to was grossly immoral
and anti-social. Huffington has just about reached the stage of
selling out to Big Brother....maybe all our stuff is sent there anyway.
We'll see. Jesus Christ!

[sa]

totally, huffington was made by the anger and rage
against bush co. and injustice - an allegiance to truth,
and now wants to pander to the middle and parlay the success
of its juice to go "mainstream."

it's like, in a sick way, o'reilley has won.
the "bad word" thing is an embarrassment to truth.

not sure if this is a phase, or the total selling out to the devil.

p.s. to not be happy with the power of those who brought you,
is like leaving a date on the eve of a prom.

[Spokane]

too bad about the "bad words filter". You are kinda like George Carlin I guess. Or maybe Lenny Bruce. Maybe just dumb.

[MiraMcB]

Ken Starr is taking up the issue of boundaries for these morons in Calif. I hope he is successful. Personally, I would like to see bounties on paparazzi. Pictures of celebrities should, imho, be taken only with permission, when they are working, by appointment through their pub reps. Anything else should be strictly off limits, including all the nasty, sordid little half-truths printed in the rags.

[scottarino]

money-talks. Those rags outsell every newspaper in this country.

[MiraMcB]

Sad commentary on the mentality of our citizenship, isn't it?

[JoDeeVa]

Uh, yeah..part of the deal Malibu mayor Conley? is proposing, with the help of Pepperdine "Dean Ken Starr" and his team of experts is NOT just boundaries, but taxing those paparazzi on the pictures they do get. So, let me get this right..they want to establish "privacy boundaries" and just in case paparazzi do manage to get the money shot, the city of Malibu wants their cut in taxes on the pictures? WTF is wrong with this picture?

I once made my humble home there, having lived in one of the Malibu canyons for many years. I remember a time when a peaceful co-existence was the way of life for ALL residents choosing to live "up the coast" in a more rural setting of greater LA. Malibu pandered to the wealthy, developed accordingly and is engulfed in the gluttony of the affluent, paparazzi included, to document every aspect of the "rich and famous"..NOW they want boundaries and punitive-taxes for the privilege? PUH-LEEZE! Talk about the epitome of egocentricity!

Surfers, valley-guys and gals, STARRS, (Ken and movie) paparazzi and gawkers galore..oh, my!
One would wish that the bigger global picture of troubled regions would merit such attention. Say..oh, how about the boundaries of Palestine/Israel? Turf-wars?..never mind privacy boundaries, the beach and high/low-tide lines..Dude, where's my country?
Malibu needs a reality check!

[dadw5boys]

Next time take the cameras sell the to a pawn shop and steal their cars sell them to a chop shop and throw the photographers in the ocean.

[Proud2BIndy]

Well said!

[scottaa]

So adults who take pictures of other adults on public property should have violent actions taken against them and have their property taken and destroyed? If you believe that, don't ever claim to be a peaceful person.

[Spokane]

well said but not for Mathew M. But if the same situation occurs for a real actor sure.

[Nebris]

They should have drown the scumbags.

[BlueOnBlue]

Look in the mirror. You're the one advocating the murder of someone who was exercising a Constitutional right.

[mapleman]

these guys are parasites, bottom feeders serving their magazine baron bosses so they in turn can continue to feed us this trashy junk diet addiction of trivial nonsense that has to stop. i am begging someone. please. make them all go away.
throw them in the ocean along with their cameras.
the whole idea of what they do and what they stand for nauseates me to no end.
make it stop daddy. please...make it stop..

[rmetz74]

Stalking is not a Constitutional right, and that's what some paparazzi do. And by "some", I mean the ones - like this guy - who follow people around in their private lives, rather than sticking to the many, many, MANY photo opps set up for them, where they can take all the pictures they want, with their subjects' consent.

[Big0725]

Please enumerate that particular right for me?

[mabinog]

Fame is a drug and not necessarily for the famous but the adolescent girls and boys squealing over Hannah Montana, the groupies skulking around sports stadiums and music concerts, and the middle age house wives and such who buy the Enquirer (sp?) and People, etc.

Paparazzi are the drug dealers of celebrity gossip and rumor. They help feed our country's shallow and disturbing fascination with the famous. It escapes me WTH anyone would care but if you want to fix the problem you will have to cut demand.

[rmetz74]

The paparazzi are to actors what telemarketers are to the public - if telemarketers were allowed to follow you around, scream in your ear, and endanger you and your family all day, every day, in the interest of selling doctored photos of and spreading libelous stories about you.

If those who say 'it's the price of fame' could live in these actors' shoes for a few days, they'd be singing a different tune. Paps should be regulated just like telemarketers, and the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that people have such incredibly warped ideas about the reality of life as a professional actor.

[mapleman]

nice. you nailed it. in one.

[andvoodoo2]

Actors PLACE THEMSELVES in the spotlight as part of their job! It's how and why they get the big bucks! Dealing with the paparazzi is all part of the job and I have zero sympathy for an actor who doesn't have his kids with him and has people taking his picture on the beach. If McConaughey calls a press conference and no photographers showed up, he would hate it.
All careers have drawbacks. Actors that the paps chase make big bucks. They can either handle the paps legally and with dignity or suffer the consequences - NO PUBLICITY!

[rmetz74]

I'm a professional actor. Not a movie star, but I get fan mail, I get recognized in public. So in your mind, the only place I'm entitled to any privacy is in my home, with the curtains drawn? As soon as I step outside, or in front of a window, I'm fair game? Nevermind that I have no way of knowing who is approaching me. They could be armed, or crazy, or both. Too bad. Total loss of all personal freedom and safety is part of the job. Oh - Unless I have a kid. (So really, for you, a kid is an accessory, an anti-press shield.)

If you could get past your own ignorance and jealousy, you might see that actors already give up huge amounts of privacy in our day-to-day lives, just by being recognizable. Stars give the press PLENTY of opportunities to take pictures at official events. And if they want to have their picture taken in their off-hours, there are tons of places in LA where paps know stars go, and stars know they'll be photographed, and there are no fights, becasue everyone involved knows the deal.

There is a pretty huge difference between appearing at a public event, and having people sleeping outside your house and following your car. It's dangerous, it's psychotic, and it's an invasion of privacy. And yes, actors have every bit as much right to privacy as anyone else.

[Fernando]

Well, let's see that paparrazo try to sue those surfers! I love it!

BTW, a paparrazo is NOT a "photojournalist".

[mathme]

BTW, a paparrazo is NOT a "photojournalist".

Thank you. :)

[demfriend]

Two sides to a sad story are that when someone actually makes it big in showbiz they are hounded for life by people taking pictures of them no matter what they do or try to prevent it. Privacy is gone and we feel as the viewing publi that we somehow have "rights' to these poor souls lives and pictures of them. So the photogs make big huge bucks off of pictures taken while these poor folks go about life and the more intrusive and personal the more bucks they make off of them. The other side is that with fame brings the understanding that the photos will be taken and that for privacy you will have to live in dark places where the pictures fail to correctly expose or pay heavy prices for places to live and play where your privacy is protected by others. Do we have a right to these pictures of people who are just trying to live their lives as we do?

[rmetz74]

Thank you.

Too many people find it too easy to believe that LA and the people who live here are somehow less real and deserving of basic decency than they are.

[scottarino]

Those "dark places" are 20,000+ square-foot-homes behind gates and manicured lawns. Cry me a river. I don't read the rags, but I sure don't feel sorry for someone wearing the "golden handcuffs" which can easily be removed.

[andvoodoo2]

"...people who are just trying to live their lives as we do?"
Oh, please. Do you have a car and driver? How about a 25,000+ square foot home behind a gate? Are your assets in the millions? OR,
Do you struggle to pay for good medical care, a mortgage and a decent education for your kids?
THAT'S "trying to live their lives as we do".

[karela]

Good for the surfers. The paparazzi have become the new low lifes of California. In the midwest, local farmers have been known to use shotguns as they assist drug dealers, who hang out around high schools, out of town. Now and again a little civil disobedience feels good and Henry David Thoreau might well approve. The paparazzi have gotten out of control and personal rights and freedoms have taken a back seat to them for too long. Princess Diana would be alive if there were laws governing these people. That alone should be enough reason to give them a dunking.

[CitizenRob]

How ironic that you don't see how personal rights and freedoms extends to the desire to do and take drugs without harassment by the state.

[nastyvirus]

That's called "the pursuit of happiness". Remember it well, because soon it won't be in the Declaration of Independence, replaced by "the pursuit of the Terrists"

[LIBERALandProudOfIt]

Princess Diana would be alive if she would have been wearing a seat belt!!!!

Let's put the real blame where it should be.

Yeah, and paparazzi are scum.

[Heidfeld]

You have no idea what you are talking about. This is not a question of civil disobedience and Henry David Thoreau would in no way approve of a bunch of drunken idiots trying to beat people up.

In this particular case, the paparazzi were isolated and not bothering anyone. But even if these people wanted to voice their displeasure and a bit of 'civil disobedience', they did not have to resort to violence. There were other ways of accomplishing their goals.

[sethrp]

Those wretched sack-jobs we generously call "paparazzi" are photojournalists like I am the President of the United F&#*ing States. Which is, to say, not. You know your country is really sideways when the guy scrambling to get a blurry, poorly framed picture of a celebrity's ass is a "photojournalist."

[RalphWaldo]

Actually Paradise Cove is a mobile home park, and the beach below it, where this happened is generally not frequented by rich people, but largely by people (and families) who live in that mobile home park (I know because I lived there for 5 years). It's not really just about "locals only," because the photographers weren't trying to surf. As someone said in an earlier comment, it's about privacy, and the right to be left alone.

I agree that celebs don't really have the right to complain about the scrutiny. They get paid handsomely just because people like to look at them. And they often court the papparazi and enjoy the attention.

But in this case, I think it's a matter of local residents drawing a line in the sand, and saying there are just some places that people want to be private.

[Cybesq]

I didn't realize making new laws was a simple as having a stick you could draw in the sand.

[MiraMcB]

In this case, it should be...

[petecook5]

HAHAHAHA! L.A. dip$hits all around. "I drink beer and party." What a joke! Poor McConnahey!

[nexus1961]

To anyone that actually LIVES in L.A., this is good news.. The Photogs race thru traffic, have caused
dozens of accidents in the last few years chasing celebs.. and I read they offered the guy a thousand
bucks to leave?? And he didn't??
They should have thrown HIM into the surf with his camera.
I hope to see more of this!

[Cybesq]

I live in LA and I am not fan of the papparazzi but to watch a bunch of moron thugs who probably live off mommy and daddy for beer money take people's personal property and assault someone is sickening.

Since they have the pictures of the people involved, I hope they prosecute these douche bags. Lets see how much fun they have when they're trying not to drop soap.

[rmetz74]

It's sickening all the way around.

What amazes me is that no one stops to think, 'Hey... This seems to happen a lot. Maybe the paparazzi industry is bumping up against basic human nature, and we should pass some laws to protect the basic rights - privacy and physical safely - of people on both sides.'

[rmetz74]

Amen.