@ What you have to remember..
So, your suggestion is that the celebrities should allow (Murdoch's) papers to walk all over them, violate their privacy with gay abandon and in some cases simply make up stories to flog newspapers?
They may be celebrities, but they are people too. They have feelings, they have families, they have rights too regardless of who may be jealous (IMHO a prime motivator of that Perez Hilton character). A lot of harm is caused by the pressure that celebrity reporters create because they must information, preferably negative, to sell newspapers.
The result is that celebrities have close to zero privacy and security because it's always possible someone flogs their diary or other information for the irresponsible amount of cash those papers can offer, and if it all goes wrong the papers just count the litigation a cost of doing business. Can you imagine having to guard your every word because the nice person you just met might be taping you to use it against you later (no joke - has happened)? Who on earth can these people eventually trust? Even old friends are rooted out by those so-called journalists and either harassed or bribed into talking about the celeb in question. A single smile at someone becomes an affair, a bad hair day becomes a cancer scare or drug use allegation - do you consider that normal?
Meanwhile, the people who could really DO with some attention get off Scott free because this lot draws off the limelight. Where were the other papers re. expenses? Why did nobody else ask questions when FOI was so tardy? *Real* journalism is thin on the ground.
The most recent reminder that there is a human behind every celeb were the few words of Michael Jackson's 11 year old daughter. Let's not forget that in many cases there are also children around, and they too get affected by this.
In case you're wondering, I'm no celebrity. But my work involves providing exactly that sort of protection a lot of them lack so I see it from up close. I wouldn't want that life for myself for the world..