First off, let me get this little caveat out of the way: Anna Nicole Smith was a person and it is tragic to her family, friends and loved ones that she passed into the great beyond. Clearly, Ms. Smith wasn’t an evil person, and while she may have made choices in her life that I wouldn’t have, my sympathy for the people she left behind has no bounds.

Still, the rampant media attention revolving around her death seems a trifle unwarranted, no? I mean, Anna Nicole Smith basically defined the idea of “fame for fame’s sake.” It’s not as if between lawsuits, drug-addled parties and cheeky appearances at the Gay Pride parade, Anna Nicole was putting out quality work in any artistic medium. For that matter, Ms. Smith didn’t exactly produce poor quality work on a regular basis. Her full-time gig was being ‘Anna Nicole Smith.’ That was her ‘work.’

Sure, she made movies, she was in a reality television series and endorsed a diet product…but not with any consistency. For example, Lindsay Lohan’s day job is ‘actress.’ Tabloid fodder is merely a side industry for the young starlet. For Anna Nicole, her stock and trade was the tabloid culture, and there was no real ‘product’ to speak of.

And yet, we paid attention to her, en masse. Moreover, we collectively rewarded her for—in essense—doing nothing to earn the special treatment and income that comes with celebrity. Even without the millions from her ancient and deceased 2nd husband, Anna Nicole Smith made tons of money without tons of product.

In life and now death, she represents a cultural shift in America…from hard work offering its own reward…to wanting something for nothing. Anna Nicole got exactly that. No effort. Tons of perks. It’s a lesson that the current generation of Tinseltown has learned quite well. After all, without Anna Nicole Smith, would there really be a Paris Hilton? I think not.

Actually, Anna Nicole worked much harder than Paris to achieve her place of useless celebrity. It’s one thing to fall out of an uber-rich vagina, only to wake up one day and say ‘I wanna be in People Magazine.’ It’s quite another to work your way from Wal-Mart to strip club to reality television. But both Anna Nicole Smith and Paris Hilton represent the same non-pinnacle: attention without merit.

Mind you, this is not an anti-fame rant. I have no problem with talented people earning a paycheck and other social schwag. The aforementioned Lindsay Lohan, while certainly getting plenty of attention for her extra-curricular activities, is first and foremost an actress. She has ability, and is required to put out new product to maintain her fame. Britney Spears, one of the many people with no musical ability able to write ‘singer’ on her tax return, made her millions through her CD sales. Shaven head and privates aside, Britney was originally defined by her ‘day job’ as ‘performer,’ not as ‘tabloid fixture.’

In addition, I’m not trying to only remember the ‘latter’ Anna Nicole Smith instead of some formerly glorious version: before the bloat, the pink velour and Bobby Trendy. In recent years, Whitney Houston has become more known for her private life than her music…but Ms. Houston at least HAD a previous career. It’s truly a tragedy that Houston wrecked her instrument, since she has (or more likely, had) one of the most remarkable vocal instruments on the planet.

With Anna Nicole, it’s tragic that she wrecked her life, but not because we lost a supreme talent. There will always be models to emulate Marylyn Monroe for Guess? Jeans. There will always be girls from Texas who implant their way to Playboy. There will not always be singers who can belt out a tune like Ms. Houston.

The easiest group to blame for this level of tabloid attention is obviously the media. If nobody visited PerezHilton.com or read “The Star,” would we even know who Anna Nicole Smith was? Or how about Paris Hilton? But millions of us (including yours, truly) take in all of the tawdry details of public lives like stink to shit. In the case of Anna, Anna, glamorous Anna, we watched solely for the train wreck, but we watch even talented celebrities to see the tawdry details play out.

My question is why. Much like plumbers, performers have a job: they perform. I truly could care less who my plumber fucked last weekend, or whether he’s gained weight since his spouse left him…so why do I care when it comes to a famous person? If I like their album, song, television series or film…should it matter how they lead their private lives? Does Angelina Jolie’s involvement with the United Nations make her a better actress? Probably not. Like my plumber, my love for the talented should come from a love of their work and the quality thereof.

We, the people, are to blame for this. If we collectively stopped giving a damn, we’d only be judging our famous people on their performances, not their media appearances. We, the people, give the tabloid culture its power and reach. Without an audience, there would be no muck to rake. And yet, there we are, glued to E! Entertainment Television, wondering if Lance and Reichen are getting back together again (even though Lance hasn’t recorded an album since his N’Sync days…and who is Reichen, exactly?)

Sadly, nearly every really talented person makes a play for this unreal attention. Christina Aguilera, who could sing the phone book and get people to listen, donned ass-less chaps to get down and dirty with the Hilton crowd. Britney Spears, seeing her album sales dwindle and her concert attendees vanish (I can see a drag queen lip sync your music for free, Britney,) almost seems to be courting the tabloid attention, from a couple of quickie marriages to vomit on her shoes.

It’s the Anna Nicole lesson come to life. Instead of the means (talent) reaching an end (fame based on your work,) fame is the end. I imagine Paris Hilton, sitting in her mansion, downing coke and bon-bons, watching Anna Nicole Smith on Entertainment Tonight and thinking “Wow, she does nothing and everybody knows her. I do nothing better than anybody…why doesn’t Entertainment Tonight follow me around?” And now they do.

Moreover, this useless celebrity translated into actual product for her. Paris Hilton released an album, and was in the horror film “House of Wax,” effectively becoming a singer and an actress on the basis of her tabloid fame. Do you really think she would have gotten the opportunity through hard work and diligence? Paris Hilton, Anna Nicole and their kin (Nicole Ritchie, Rick Salomon, K-Fed…) have swung the pendulum.

In the past, the tabloid press followed you around after you hit it big, based on your performances. Shannen Doherty became famous because of her roles in “Heathers” and “Beverly Hills, 90210.” There would have been no “I Hate Brenda” newsletter without the character of Brenda Walsh as created by Shannen. The paparazzi wouldn’t have followed her every move unless she had viable product to support her lifestyle. Whether you like her or hate her, Shannen Doherty’s career is dependent on her work (and in this case, the bad tabloid press she got may have impacted Ms. Doherty’s ability to deliver on the potential she showed in “Heathers.”)

Since the Anna Nicole age began, product isn’t necessary. The aforementioned relationship between fame and product is now inverted. Tara Reid hasn’t had a hit since “American Pie,” and yet she’s always in the press. Have we seen Denise Richards in anything lately? Nope…but I know that her ex-husband hired hookers and that she’s been photographed snorting coke on the beach (again, thanks PerezHilton.com.) Should these people really be rich and famous at all?

That’s the lesson that Anna Nicole Smith taught me: certain people don’t deserve the right to fame. Don’t misunderstand me: that’s a very different statement than "certain people can’t handle the pressure of fame." The latter suggests that a strong character and constitution are required to navigate the eddies of celebrity. The former puts celebrities on notice: if you want to be famous, then you need to offer the public a product that demonstrates your abilities, your talent, your vision.

Tom Cruise has twenty plus years of career under his belt. He has earned the right to his fame, and accordant press attention. Mel Gibson’s Jew-bashing drunken rant merits reporting because he just released a massive hit movie that suggested this dark ideology permeates his soul, and has an entire body of work to tarnish with his bigotry. And, of course, if we live in a world where Matthew Shepard can die on the fence for being gay, then we also live in a world where the rewards of fame shouldn't shield you from the realities of politics (the thought of [insert closeted gay celebrity here] sitting by the pool in Beverly Hills while Shepard died in agony makes me violently ill. When did cowardice become a virtue?)

There will always be tabloids showing the dark side of fame…and there should be. Would Joan Crawford have been able to beat the living tar out of her kids (allegedly) with TheSuperficial.com on her toes, instead of a complacent press gently requesting a photograph? But Joan Crawford made films from the 1920s to the 1970s. She had a body of work that warrants attention, outside of her extra-curricular activities. The tragedy of Crawford is that she is more known for being “Mommie Dearest” than for being one of the most successful and prolific actors of any generation. Joan’s tarnished image has effectively negated the impact her work made on the industry. But at least she had a career to kill. Can we say the same about Hilton, Ritchie, and, of course, Anna Nicole Smith?

Of course not…and we, the people need to change this paradigm for the future. From now on,  fame needs to be based upon ability. Britney doesn’t have to be the most talented singer in the world (what a tragic and tone-deaf planet this would be if she was,) but she does need to release a product to continue to enjoy the perks of celebrity. Tara Reid’s tits can fall out of her dress at every red carpet event, provided that a film or two (that she’s actually in) falls out as well.

We, the people, have revealed to the famous (and the famous-in-training,) that we are quite easily amused. All you have to do is show up and act inappropriate to be showered with attention and money. It’s time for we, the people, to take the honor of fame and give it to the people who deserve it. So, the next time you hear about Paris Hilton’s latest sex tape, my advice is to just ignore it. If you want the goods, you’ve got to get a job, not just give one.

Aaron Michael Gordon