Honestly something like this was so overdue.
Even the "fashion" shoots that end up with photos on the "portraits and poses" section elicit more responses along the lines of "Woo hoo", "hot model", "sexy outfit" or "WOW upz for the model" rather than any genuine attempt to critique the photo, style, pose, lighting, appropriateness of venue and attire.
I mean is it any wonder that someone was going to eventually take a shoot and "exploit" it to "expose" what they see as a bunch of testosterone fueled guys salivating over a photo with no real interest in the "art" beyond the curve of her buttocks and shape of her legs?
This does not apply to everyone, I am far from a prude, but this has been a trend in the comments, and it does not add evidence to the pile that says "serious hobbyist photographers" rather it adds fuel to the fire that says "dirty lecherous GWC". And really just as it is up to the photographer to ensure the success of a shoot, it is up to us here to ensure the image of photographers is one we are proud of.
Not any more or less than to look out for anyone else. Considering others is also known as "being considerate".#2 It is everyone's responsibility to look out for it (them / the reporters - I assume)
You only have to hide from journalists if you have something to hide, no?#3 If you dont take the necessary action - Are we suppose to alret someone when we realise a suer is a reporter or "brand" them so that the various shoot organisers know who they are and banned them from the shoot in case they report on them?
seriously though, there have been many celebrities who have had a very clean, low-key record despite being high profile.
more often than not i would think that the celebrity sometimes does things deliberately; if you read the book paparazzi by peter howe, you'll know what i mean, it's a very interesting diversion read.