Because the same idiots who are glued to 'reality' TV think these toads are 'celebrities' because that is what we are told.

There is no more "news" as it's all run by the entertainment division (of some big Eastern Syndicate).

Kim Kardashian is rich, and therefore important, according to the rules of our society.
Ever since we have had separate classes of people, the "lower" class has been obsessed with the "upper" class. The society created by the powerful (which, in our country, means really rich) says that they are more interesting, attractive, cultured, righteous, or whatever the words for "better" is at the time.

Aw, fuck'em. I hate 'em all. Cunts and cocks is all they are, when you get right down to it.

I don't care, but think it's all part of the dumbing down of America. You can't escape this, it's even in the papers, on the news, everywhere.

The idea of the government minting a trillion dollar coin to skirt actually creating a budget and living within it isn't sexy, so we get the distraction while we get driven further into debt.

I really wish they would all go back to People magazine, so I could ignore them.

Yeah, I saw that on the news this morning, MarkD, about the new coin. Bastards. Who do they think they're fooling, anyway, besides themselves? Oh yeah, the VAST majority of the voters, who they lie to constantly. How sad that the majority actually believe them.

What is a "Kim Kardashian"?

Amy, was the article definitely about Kim? I think her divorce was final last year. There are rumors that her mother, Kris, and her sister Khloe may be getting divorced. They are also famous Kardashians.

That doesn't change the nature of the question. Here are my theories:

1. Kim Kardashian is beautiful and rich. I think a lot of young women want to know what it's like to have limitless funds to look as beautiful as you want, travel in style, go anywhere. It's like how I used to play with Barbie and paper dolls. She is a walking catalog of designer items. Men drool over her. Girls want to see how she does it and find relief in knowing her flaws.

2. She strategically places herself in a fish bowl, even at the expense of her vanity. She gets Botox and Lasik on camera. She shares her weight-gain woes and her screaming fights with her family. This makes her both intriguing and accessible.

It also makes her a topic that even strangers have in common. Why do we talk about Kim Kardashian? Because she recently did something outrageous, and everyone knows what we're talking about. I don't watch the show, and I can tell you tons of stuff about all of them.

3. Reality television and tabloids are addictive. Even if you scoff at them, once you know the characters and the basic plot, you become interested. They're scripted and edited to make people do shocking things, and often you can't help but see how it plays out. You get a sense of Schaudenfreude when someone does something stupid. You feel better thinking you'd never do that.

4. They are marketing geniuses. They "live out" plots because that's their job. (One example is this "looming" divorce of Kim's mother. I doubt very much that it's real. They will "save their marriage" at the last minute, and in the meantime, they're on covers.) They have clothing lines, perfume lines, shoes, weight loss supplements. Every time they debut a new line, they get press and stay relevant. Watch for Kim to design baby clothes any day now.

They also get money for wearing other people's stuff on their show. They get money for tweeting from certain locations or about certain products.

All of this hinges on them being famous, even if it's "negative" fame. They get that. And Kim deserves the admiration for doing it so well.

Oh, to directly answer the question "Do you care...?"

I don't /care/ about them, but I am curious about them. The gossip interests me until it becomes repetitive.

I would rather have my face eaten off by a raccoon

This.

"We evolved to care about people we know because news about them might impact on our welfare."

This sounds right to me. I stay interested until I'm sure the gossip has no similarity whatsoever to my life. My ears perk up when I hear about a relationship breakup, because I don't want a divorce, and my brain wants that info. On some level I'm figuring out if I'm safe.

I know all the smart Amy readers are going to sound off about how uninteresting the Kardashians are, but I think you guys are obviously not the norm.

Here's another question for you: just what else are you going to talk about?

I find few are interested in the latest ISS or LHC discovery, many don't know how anything is built, most believe hearsay about nearly everything.

Common ground is just... common.

Care about attention whores? I stopped that in sixth grade.

Really, radwaste? It sounds as though you advocate watching reality tv so that we can all have something to talk about.

I have found that there are plenty of subjects to talk about without resorting to reality tv. Especially if one is interested in knowledge for its own sake. I don't know how most things are built, but if I encountered you, and I knew that you did, that's probably where I would want to lead the conversation, both because it interests you and because I would be learning something.

I find reality TV voyeuristic, so don't watch it.

I recently posted on facebook about this. I saw a headline that Kim Kardashian is pregnant and opined that I am a Judgy McJudgerson who thinks she should've waited until her divorce was final. I only know her divorce isn't final because of headlines - I never actually read these stories.

Not that I never read celebrity news, but I can't even place the amount I care about the Kardashians on a microgiveashit meter. I resent that I know anything about them, but legitimate news sources give headline space to these people as if they're news.

"Really, radwaste? It sounds as though you advocate watching reality tv so that we can all have something to talk about."

It's not a reason TO watch it. It's a reason people probably do watch it. They're essentially sharing campfire stories.

I LOVE Kim Kardashian! She is so much fun to laugh at, a la Lindsey, Brittney, and Paris.

If you take away the Kardashians, who else will we laugh at? Politicians get old after a while.

To quote Hannibal Lecter, they covet what they see every day. (Some Kardashian format is on TV every day. It's the 21st century MASH. It's an improvement over the 20th century MASH. IMAO.) Anyway, the Kardashians got famous in the usual 21st century way: by being pretty and shameless. Then they got rich. (Also, they reeked slightly of Republican, what with the multiple offspring and general fecundity and sense of entitlement and Bruce the traditional dad figure.) Then they became the object of class envy and contempt. Which brought them more attention. Rinse and repeat.

My daughter and I were flipping through channels one night and their show was on.I have to admit that it was some fun mindless entertainment for awhile and I am impressed by the fact that though they may be famous for nothing, they aren't out getting in trouble on a regular basis. They seem pretty grounded and appear to have a good work ethic.

I also say kudos to anyone who could turn nightmare publicity like a sex tape into a $65 million a year product. I don't have to really care about them to think that they did a pretty good job for themselves.

I read somewhere that the reason that people are so obsessed with her looks is that in my generation the "exotic" look is more popular than the the typical blonde blue eyed girl next door look of yester year.

I.e. big butt, dark hair, dark features, curvy.

You know I love her makeup artist. He does all these drag queen tricks on her face.

She is a pretty girl that alot of girls (fatties & skinnies, regular chicks ya know?) wish to emulate.

"They seem pretty grounded and appear to have a good work ethic."

They are not grounded at all, but do have a good work ethic. They are very trashy but that's what makes them entertaining. Trashy people with money! If they were grounded nobody would be watching.

Kim's mom is behind everything, including selling the sex tape. She is the mastermind. Remember she manages everyone with precision, including some of Lamar's deals with the lakers.

"What is a 'Kim Kardashian'?

Some kind of sweater, isn't it?

Looked it up last night and read that he wants an annulment but she refused because it would damage her image. I don't care either way.

One tidbit that caught my eye was ownership of the engagement ring. Article said it was worth a couple million and he wants it back, but she refused.

Now I'm just annoyed that my mind is still debating who should get the ring.

"Really, radwaste? It sounds as though you advocate watching reality tv so that we can all have something to talk about."

beth, I don't really think you understand what Radwaste was saying. Did you even recognize his terminology? ISS or LHC? When Radwaste says something, it's usually something worth paying attention to, and in this case, he wasn't saying what you implied...at all.

OK, to answer the question: I have heard of Kim Kardashian and I recognize the fact that she's female, attractive and a "celebrity," whatever that means.

Do I care? Um, no.

Neither do I pay homage to the term "dignitary," either. As person is as dignified as he behaves, and political "celebrities" are often the least dignified of any individual in the room.

Damn. I knew I should have proofread first. Let's try this again:

Neither do I pay homage to the term "dignitary." A person is as dignified as he behaves, and a political "celebrity" is often the least dignified of any individual in the room.

Sorry for taking up the extra bandwidth.

Men drool over her.

I imagine plenty of men do, but I'm not a member of that club. She's very pretty (and I'm a sucker for that dark-haired, dark-eyed look) but I've heard her talk and she sounds like a little girl. Not sexy to me.

Now Kathryn Bigelow...there's a woman who inspires copious drooling.

"They are not grounded at all, but do have a good work ethic. They are very trashy but that's what makes them entertainment"

I'd still say they're pretty grounded. They all seem to not only be aware of how fortunate they are financially and even with their fame for not really doing much of anything and they also seem appreciative of it. Before the fame, the girls all worked. Kim and Khloe aren't big party girls and Kourtney left her party days behind when she got pregnant. I have respect for people who can live their life in a fishbowl and still live a pretty respectable life in other ways. There's a lot worse out there as far as celebrity goes and while I don't look at celebrities for role models, I think you can do a lot worse than girls who worked hard and still work hard. As much as they have wealth and fame their are still aspects that people feel they can relate to. That's why people love them.

I wouldn't recognize her face if I saw her, mostly because reality TV bores me. Other things bore me, too, so that's not a judgment call on people who like that stuff.

Other topics can be dangerous. Hell, even talking about the weather can lead to a screaming match about global warming. Celebrity gossip is safe. Gossip is a form of social bonding, and it's far safer to gossip about celebrities than someone you know.

I truly don't know much about the Kardashian's. About the only reason I know who they are is because one year the Today Show parodied them for Halloween and Lester Holt played Bruce Jenner. Other than that I didn't know about a sex tape.

The same thing for Paris Hilton, and I generally try to avoid the Hilton chain because she has irritated me with her "popularity".

There are some "celebrities" I semi-follow, but they usually have some kind of talent or other reason for their popularity: Jewel, Taylor Swift, Sullenberger, etc. Of course when they start to shill for some left-wing stupidity like the ASPCA, my interest generally wanes, rapidly.

I attended the USAF survival school in WA state. So I watched the first season of Survivor. Then when I found out it was not truly about survival, I was disappointed. After that I generally give all reality shows a pass. I will watch a reality over a sitcom, any day though, within limits. (Hell's Kitchen vs. 2 broke girls.)

I'd watch reality that had some reality -- redoing houses for vets that are injured or disabled. The Red Cross and other organizations rebuilding houses in Joplin, MO.

To sum up my long winded explication:

I quite frankly don't care about any of the "celebrities". I'd rather know about real heroes. Not the ones designated by major media.

The thing about getting old is the compression of time.

And I'm all, like, didn't we just go through this with Paris Hilton?

Celebrity culture goes away when you ignore it. In every way that couple possibly matter, it ceases to exist. You'll be glad you did.

The only thing you'll miss is a few jokes.

Joke, joke

joke, joke

Joke, joke

Joke, joke

Joke, joke

Insufficent, she's not divorced yet. He wants her to admit fraud and give him an annulment which she probably would have done to just get it over with if she wasn't getting such bad publicity from people saying her wedding was a sham. Now she's pregnant with another man's baby and the divorce could go to trial by her due date if she doesn't either give in or give a large settlement. Not too smart, but she did always seem stupid when it came to relationships.

"Men drool over her."

Or spit at her family. Same same.

The only 'reality TV' shows I watch are Dream Machines and Face Off, and I'm not too thrilled with the way Dream Machines started spending more time on recepiant reactions over fabrication as the first season went on