SquawkRadio Comments

I think that baby is absolutely gorgeous.<BR><BR>I also think the release of her pictures was very well-timed and had nothing to do with “protecting” her and everything to do with making the public want to see her more than any other celebrity baby.  <BR><BR>I also think it has to do with Tom Cruise’s desperate attempt to revamp his image - a sincere, heartfelt apology to Brooke Shields and release of his baby’s pictures in the same week?  Seems like more than just a coincidence.  I think he’s trying to win back those female fans he’s alienated with his crazy talk.  <BR><BR>Now as for what I’d do if I was a celebrity - I understand the desire to protect your children, but I think if you kept your kids out of the public eye entirely and refused all pictures, the ensuing frenzy of the paparazzi desperate to get even a small glimpse of your child would put your kid at more risk.  You’d pretty much have to be a recluse to ensure that no one had pictures of your children (as Katie has had to do).

I think Tom and Katie have every right to keep their children private. Just because they are celebs doesn’t mean they have to expose their children to the media as well.  (Although, they tended to open themselves up to that exposure with the whole thing about the “silent birthing”.)<BR><BR>Fans will always be curious and anxious to see celebrity babies.  However, I believe we have to respect the rights of the celebrities, as parents, to protect their children and keep them out of the public eye if that is their choice.

The baby is gorgeou and looks just like mom.  I don’t really see Tom in her yet. <BR><BR>Let’s see, if I were famous I would not want my kids to be photographed.  There should be some things that are held sacred in Hollywood.  Lord knows they tell us whose sleeping with whom, whose divorcing, whose gay, whose buying a new house, who prefer call girls, etc.  Information overload that, yes I know they are rich and famous and doing things millions of other people would love to do, but they should still be able to keep somethings to themselves.  Their children did not ask to be followed, photographed, or chased by the paparazzi.  The years of being just a kid are so short now a days that they just need to be just that - kids.  <BR><BR>Given the level of fame of Tom and now Katie, I would have prefered to keep the world guessing for a few more years.<BR><BR>Deb

I think celebrities have every right to keep their children private and not allow them to be photographed.  That being said, what I found suspicious/annoying about the entire thing was how they had practically shoved their relationship, their engagement, and their pregnancy down the throats of the public, only to do a complete turnaround as soon as the baby was born.<BR><BR>Personally, I think that publishing one photo early would be the best course of action.  Brad and Angelina did, and you don’t see the press and public hounding them for pictures anymore (or if they are, not nearly as much).

Hi, I’m new to this blog, but I’ve gone back and read a lot of the old ones.  Just wanted to drop in and say hi to everyone.  Sorry this comment isn’t on topic.

Hi bithalynn

Welcome Bithalynn!  We’re delighted to have you! <BR><BR>I think Brad and Angelina were pretty ingenious for selling their baby’s pics for so much money, then turning around and donating the money to charity.  If you’re going to do it, that’s a good way.

Teresa, what do you mean, IF you were a celebrity? You know you’re famous, at least to us Squawk readers! You even showed up in a dream I had recently - if that doesn’t mean you’re famous...<BR><BR>Anyway, I certainly think that celebs shouldn’t have to allow photos of their child whenever the media/public wants them, but I agree with Shawna that Tom and Katie kind of brought the frenzy on themselves by having every part of their relationship documented - the Oprah couch and the engagement announcement, especially - and then not allowing anyone to see them with Suri after birth. It feels like they intentionally built all this suspense before allowing her to be seen, when all it would take to calm it down somewhat would be to take her out for a walk in a stroller. With all that rampant speculation about the pregnancy being fake, it’s no wonder everyone made a big deal about not seeing her! It just fed the fire even more.

Little Suri is gorgeous!  (And as i noted yesterday has more hair at 5months than my husband at 35! *eek* ) :p<BR><BR>I think that it’s their right to keep the baby to themselves.  How would any of us feel if we read in the paper (and internet and everywhere else for that matter) that the light of our lives was imaginary, alien and didn’t exisit. <BR><BR>PS Dang but Katie has a long neck!

I believe that Celebraties do have a right to privacy where their children are concerned because of kidnappings etc.  I could never understand why here, in the U.S, they never blur the childrens faces like they do in European magazines, newspapers etc.<BR><BR>Baby Suri is adorable and I think she does look like both of her parents.

As much as I abhore Tom Cruise, I have to agree with their decision to keep her under wraps.  Frankly, I didn’t know what all the fuss was about.  I don’t envy their struggle to bring some form of balance into her life.  She will be out there and an object of curiosity because of her parents, so it’s best they all get used to it and set parameters with the press to respect their privacy.  Their situation is also unique in that both of them are celebrites.<BR><BR>I am also glad to hear that he apologized to Brooke Shields.  I would hope that this birth has been an eye opening experience for him in more ways than one.  In order to talk the talk, you have to walk the walk.

I’m not a big Tom-and-Katie fan but I agree with you.<BR><BR>Although celebrities have to accept media intrusion into their lives as part of the job, they’re still entitled to their privacy. They might not get it, some might not even want it, but they have a right to it, all the same.

I think celebrities have every right to not share photos/details of their kids. But I am deeply suspicious that this was a very cold, calculating move on Cruise’s part to revive his failing popularity.<BR><BR>Many celebrity parents, I’m thinking of Meryl Streep, choose to raise their kids truly out of the spotlight, and are willing to behave in a decorous, mature fashion to assure the minimum of papparazzi attentions.<BR><BR>In addition, it bothers me deeply that truly trivial matters like this assume such momentous importance, to the detriment of paying attention to the really important issues that will have infinitely more impact on our lives than which parent Suri resembles, because, when you think of it, that doesn’t matter a hill of beans.<BR><BR>martha the curmudgeon<BR>p.s. my log on phrase was pkuut.<BR>I couldn’t agree more

I think Sarah Jessica Parker does the paparazzi the right way.  If she is out w/ her kids and the photographers see her, she will let them take as many photos as they want as long as the kids aren’t in them.  I think that’s cool because she’s still being accessible but she is protecting her children

I’m with Sariah on this one.  Tom Cruise touting a desire for privacy seems suspect to me, especially given his recent apology to Brooke Sheilds and his production company losing their business with Paramount.<BR><BR>It’d be tough balancing celebrity and privacy, but some seem to manage it very well.

What santa said.  : )

I’m on the fence.  I think as a fan it is neat to see the celebrity children of the stars.  But, at the same time, I understand a need for privacy.  There really should be a line that the paparazzi is not allowed to cross.  I feel bad for the celebrities when you see them in a picture with their little darlings and it’s obvious that they would like to cram the camera that’s snapping pictures of their every move down someones throat.  I couldn’t begin to imagine what that would feel like for myself or my kids.  Hmmm… Did any of that make sense?  Like I said I see both sides of the piture. So to speak.

I agree with all of you—Suri is gorgeous!  My only feeling about these pictures, is why the heck couldn’t they sell them and give the money to charity?  There’s so many people who need help.<BR><BR>But that’s me, and I was raised in one of those engage-in-good-actions-or-you-end-up-a-crisp-households.<BR><BR>If you know what I mean.  *g*<BR><BR>But what a beauty she is! Here’s another thought:  maybe she had that birth acne some babies get and they didn’t want her plagued by bad photos her whole life.<BR><BR>Eloisa

Bithalynn, welcome!<BR><BR>One of the things we agreed on when we started Squawk was that we wouldn’t post photos of our kids and expose them to the crazies who are rampant on the web—and no, I’m not talking about YOU crazies, but the real ones. And we’re not celebrities, really, most people don’t know who we are, but when it comes to our kids, we’re not taking chances.

I feel Tom and Katie have every right to protect their child in any way they see fit just like any parents. Their daughter is just darn cute. I think the fascination with the Tomkat and Brangelina’s babies is plain curiosity to see if beautiful parents make beautiful babies. I think Gwen Stefani’s little one is also adorable and every other little babies out there.  Conclusion: any thing little is consider cute until grown.

When Xtina talks about “crazies”, she’s really referring to me and Connie.  <BR><BR>And I did think the meanest thing the media did was start hinting that the baby was “hideously disfigured” or perhaps even a figment of their imaginations.  Now that’s hitting below the belt!  <BR><BR>Laura T, I hope I had clothes on in your dream! I wasn’t riding a giant chicken, was I?

I thought that was so weird, Alybra, when everyone was talking about “what a beautiful baby” Brad and Angelina would make.  I mean, aren’t ALL babies beautiful?  <BR><BR>And isn’t that a question for the ages?  If all kids are cute, how come all adults aren’t cute?

I’ll admit that I was curious to see a picture of baby Suri, but at the same time, when the pictures came out I was a little sad that Tom and Katie felt like they had to cave to the pressure.  If they want to keep her out of the public eye, so be it.  But, as my friend pointed out, at least they got to do it their way and on their terms.<BR><BR>I think she’s adorable!  And all those ridiculous rumors that Katie was never pregnant and that’s not their baby are just that - ridiculous.

Yes, she is a beautiful baby. I agree with TomKat about keeping her under wraps. <BR>I also think what Brangelina did to raise money for charity is so generous of them. I admire them for that. Most rich people are never satisfied with the amount of money they have. They always want more and more and more.<BR><BR>I think the paparazzi should be ashamed of themselves for publishing stories about Baby Suri saying she is deformed or some such thing.<BR>That was just downright cruel and mean!!!!

I have never seen a Tom Cruise movie, and after his antics on Oprah have been replayed for the gajillionth, I never will. He just does not impress me. I feel sorry for Kate. Having someone shadow you all day to make certain you do everything according to Scientology standards is just too creepy.<BR><BR>As for keeping Suri under wraps. That’s their option. <BR><BR>I agree with Teresa - all babies are beautiful.<BR><BR>I do wonder if the money from Vanity Fair will help offset the loss of the Paramount contract, though.<BR><BR>Ann

I heard somewhere that they didn’t get any money for the pictures.

she is beautiful!!!!!!<BR><BR> she looks like katie<BR> thank goodness!!!!!!

Ditto on the “all babies are beautiful”.  I have never understood the “baby contests” that are held at the local fairs and festivals.  Don’t all parents think their baby is the most beautiful baby ever How could anyone be asked to judge such a thing is beyond me.

oh, I’m sorry .  my mother told me always to cover my mouth when I yawn.  Tom and his little sister make me sleepy.<BR><BR>Am I getting mean spirited?  I know you’ll be honest with me.<BR><BR>I would never post a pic of my children online, and I’m very careful about info I give out. And I’m nobody.<BR><BR>I think celebs make the choice to be in the limelight, but their kids don’t.  So I like what Martha and anny said about stars who behave well with the media so their kids get respect.

"Tom and his little sister” <BR><BR>Bar har har, Michelle!  Too funny!

And I can’t get over how weird it must be to grow up and marry the guy you used to have posters of on your bedroom wall as a teen.  Only in America!

Doesn’t he have 2 children already? I wonder what they think about all this? Maybe, yeah, it’s not us any more. I think we know too much about ol Tom’s private life, anyway..  :-{ <BR>I’m with you, Michelle, and your not a nobody!

I have to comment about not posting pictures of our children on the internet.  It is rule number one in our household.  Sadly, there are too many sick people who have access to the ability to access, manipulate and distribute pictures of our precious ones.  I’ve seen proud parents post pictures of their kids as avatars.  I don’t even send pictures of my kids attached to emails to friends and it’s all my husband’s fault.  He works for an IT department and his area of expertise is computer security and privacy.  Needless to say, we are locked down better than the government.<BR><BR>Santa - off her soapbox

Ha, Teresa! I think you riding a giant chicken would have been so much more interesting! All that happened was I suddenly appeared in your house and we got to hang out like old friends and had a great time. Rather than you freaking out and calling the cops, as I’m sure any normal person would do if a stranger suddenly appeared in their home. I’ve actually dreamed about half the Squawkers. Maybe I spend too much time here…

A parent has every right to protect their child.  <BR><BR>I don’t blame them in delaying her public debut. <BR><BR><BR>Pam

Suri is cute but sorry not all babies are beautiful. <BR><BR>Check out Heidi Klum and Seal’s baby. He is fug.

I think that as parents they have every right to shield thier child from the public. It disgusts me that people think that they have some sort of right to nose into other people’s lives, even if they are celebrities. Ugh, makes me sick. <BR><BR>Don’t even get me started on paparazzi.

I see no reason for anybody to have to show off their child to the public, especially in this day and age. I despise the reporters’ saying that “the public has the right to know.” No, I think everybody has a right to privacy if they want it. Of course, some people don’t.<BR><BR>The idea of “the public’s right to know” is just an excuse for wallowing in sensationalism. The readers of these magazines would be much better off if they looked after their own children and their own business.