Eliza Dushku slams newspaper as 'parasite' after Hayden Panettiere attack

Contributed by
Dec 15, 2012, 11:18 AM EST

Heroes star Hayden Panettiere got buried in snark by a UK newspaper last week because she was charging fans for autographs at a con, even though it's pretty much standard practice these days. And Eliza Dushku wasn't going to let them get away with it!

After the Daily Mail wrote an article about a Toronto con, making it look as if Panettiere was desperate for cash and charging for autographs due to lack of work, Dushku wrote:

Dear Sir,

I write to you because the piece of your paper that concerns me was anonymous. The piece was 27th August titled "Are times that tough Hayden?" ridiculing and attacking the actor Hayden Panettiere for participating in a Toronto Expo fan gathering where fans are charged money (Oh shock! Oh shame!) in exchange for autographs, signed pictures, and the chance for a bit of face time with their favorite celebrity.

My dear editor, how does Hayden's action differ from what you do for much of the content of your "news" paper? There we have celebrities exchanging their name (sometimes willy-nilly, no permission asked), their time, and their pictures in exchange for a bit of publicity for their work. At least the fan shows (such as the current Toronto Expo one) are honest and up front about the exchange. In addition, at these shows both fans and celebrities get some precious small contact with each other as real people. Your paper does not provide that value.

Yes, you will have to tell me where you think you get off attempting to diminish a young actor who is attempting to reach out to fans in one of the only practical ways provided by the entertainment industry, an industry your paper is a part of and largely dependent on.

It is particularly shoddy that the author scoffs at Hayden's lack of "Harry Potter" or "Spiderman" fame while leaving himself unnamed as "Daily Mail Reporter." Talk about being a parasite! Does Daily Mail Reporter want to shoot down Hayden's career, just at it's beginning, and then take a salary for doing so. Seriously, Sir, for shame.


What do you make of all this? Which side is in the right? Or is the truth somewhere in between?

(via Bleeding Cool)