What is Digg?65 Comments
- qwerty1024, on 10/10/2007, -3/+107I took a picture of Paris Hilton topless the other day. I got 3 bucks for it
- eschompthis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+51she has no *****
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+41HOLY ***** LOOK @ ANNA NICOLE'S FAKE EYELASHES.
/scared!!! - shifty2, on 10/10/2007, -2/+36IIRC, the Shiloh picture's money was donated to a charity that Jolie does a lot of work for, which is nice, im sure the other money for the other pictures went for stupid *****.
- spamly, on 10/10/2007, -1/+28This is f*'n retarded. Can't you find something else to worship?
- BUrAph, on 10/10/2007, -0/+23It's the people who are willing to buy a $6 dollar magazine plastered with these kinds of pictures that are to blame.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19who ***** cares.
you have the internet now.
***** "celebrities". - timusca, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Larry Burkhead was criticized because he couldn't support that baby on a photographer's salary. I think $2 million will do just fine. Of course, the irony here is that he made most of his money getting a photo taken OF him and not BY him.
- AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -1/+15Just what justifies BUYING a photo of her though?
- meshman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Title should be "Most expensive baby photos"
- Scrappy1850, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13i want my 3 dollars back, please
- shifty2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11you retard, look at the first comment. they donated all the money to a charity that handles that kind of stuff.
- Buzzby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Anyone else hate the way forbes.com is designed?
- liambarron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+103 bucks?! lucky...
- ngmcs8203, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10The video showing her getting nailed by her boyfriend showed that she has enough to justify selling a photo.
- Infantrydude, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11Wow good to see money is being paid for high quality reporting that effects every ones life instead of shallow yellow journalistic tripe. Yep that is modern journalism for you Pulitzer would be proud.
- CaptainNoPants, on 10/10/2007, -6/+13sure she does, she has the receipt to prove it
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7There are millions of housewives who live their lives vicariously through these people that are featured in the magazines like People and Us Weekly because they got knocked up at 20 years old, didn't finish their sophomore year of college, are divorced with a 3 and 6 year old child from different fathers and sit around in spandex and flip flops drinking Diet Coke and wishing their lives could be as good as that. There will always be a market for celebrities.
- NeoCortex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I think the going rate is about $3mil if you can spot her with her pants on.
- estvir, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Not only that but she is damn ugly.
- airquotes, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Gods sake man, its a BABY!!!
- techlinks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That was a different picture.
:P - GawtMilk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4The Most Expensive Photos Taken With an iPhone [PICS]
- tefeari, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Supply and demand... This should pose the question of how rational the people's demands are.
- andburn1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but do you like whores? And I mean the word in every possible way it could be used. Sexually, professionally... she's a whore. Not attractive at all. Plus, she's such a bitch.
- GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4I think her ***** are alright (then again I like small *****) but it's questionable just where they have been.
I like cats but I wouldn't pick up a stray. - TheMonitor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2That is such an obscene ammount of money for a picture. I think Tiger Woods did it best when he posted the pictures for free on his website.
- andburn1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah, but they sell for gooood cash.
- rspeed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Well there's a news flash.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Stupid people obviously do, yes.
- MattB123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I know who about half of these people are. I think if you paid the cover price of the magazine, you overpaid for these.
- allthewhile, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The problem is that your demographic isn't quite right. US and People are read by millions of 20 something college age girls, housewives, and the occasional guy when he's sitting on the crapper. It may be stupid, but I don't really want to read Dostoevsky when I'm dropping a deuce.
- andburn1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Then read Popular Science or The NYT Magazine, just for starters. There's a LOT in between People and Dostoevsky.
- JonTheGoose, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It sucks that there are so many art photographers out there struggling with their craft when this is the kind of ***** that makes millions...
- maliha11, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0if shailo's pic. was tagged to 4.1 million .. then what would michel jackson kids pics would be tagged to a billion something ???
- chicoer2001, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1What a world when a celebrity's baby is a celebrity.
- andburn1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1When you can find hotter girls more naked for less (or no) money online, I think the answer to your question must be "nothing."
- jdh24, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2do people really care this much about 'celebrities'? i don't.
- iMaciMan1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Nope, that money couldn't have gone to poor children in some 3rd world country or something, pictures of someone's baby is much more worth 4 mil.
- santiago1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Fixed that statement for you:
It sucks that there are so many hard working people out there struggling with their lives when these ***** are the ones making millions. - rowlodge, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1funny ,because they're such bad actors...despite their salaries.
- GunRunner, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Ha ha ha....Yeah there isn't a lot of value there.
- coheedcollapse, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Disgusting that a photo of someone who hasn't done anything more but stay in the public eye warrants millions of dollars..
Paparazzi are sellouts. - yeahbuddy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Talk about the money shot!
- skall, on 12/17/2008, -0/+0Check out Celebrity photo albums, songs, lyrics, videos, news, slideshows
http://www.celeb9.com - spudnic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The money for these photos is an investment on behalf of the magazine/paper/whatever, they make more money from improved sales than the cost of the photos.
Aaaanyway, don't blame the journalists, blame the idiots who eat up all the celebrity ***** - SnuKs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1It's good to know something beneficial came outta those pics. I really respect that from Angelina.
- TBoneFever, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1"Not only that but she is damn ugly"...especially now that she's dead.
- slickricks, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1More than I would have paid.
- twisterrust, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1and when I take pictures.. I have to pay myslef to get them developed... *shaking head*
:) -
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is