Seven days without news on Paris Hilton makes the gossip mags weak.

But Associated Press did what many in the media had only dreamed about – imposing a blanket ban on stories about the socialite heiress from February 19.

“Editors just wanted to see what would happen if we didn’t cover this media phenomenon, this creature of the internet gossip age, for a full week,” AP’s Jocelyn Noveck wrote on March 2.

“Would anyone care? Would anyone notice?”

People noticed, although not one of the thousands of media outlets on AP’s roster called looking for a Paris story.

Instead, ironically, the ‘no-Paris’ ban became a story in itself when an AP internal memo surfaced in The New York Observer and on the gossip website Gawker.com.

The idea of the ban sparked serious debate about the power of news organisations to set and manipulate the news agenda.

“Some felt we were tinkering dangerously with the news,” Noveck wrote.

“Whom, they asked, would we ban next? ‘I vote we do the same for North Korea,’ one AP writer said facetiously.”

On the flip side, by tracking this dubious celebrity’s every move, has the media made a rod for its back: encouraging public demand for the minutiae of Ms Hilton’s life, loves and liaisons, along with her paid promotional appearances.

Some argue the “Paris virus” has spread as media outlets succumb to the one-size-fits-all malaise – covering stories because “everybody else is covering it, so we should too”.

At any rate, AP’s ban ended on February 27 when Hilton was arrested for driving with a suspended licence.

Now the challenge is set: which media organisation will dare to take the experiment beyond a week?

Photo: James Alcock, Sydney Morning Herald