The Official Anti-Conspiracy Theory Thread

[SlayOut]

6 minutes ago, Matou said:

I know thanks, you made an anti-conspiracy thread so why not talking about this ? It's a debunk thread or not?

Again, there is already a thread made especially for people who believe Britney does not control her Instagram, and I do not want to derail this thread with a conversation that can easily happen in that thread.

I've shared my perspective before, that I believe Britney has some say over what is posted. Why would Team Con approve of captions that mention the word "conservatorship", that shade Jamie Lynn, or that use the #FreeBritney hashtag? 

Do I think she's sitting on her couch typing up captions in the IG app and pressing post herself? No. Most celebrities have a communications or social media team to do that. Has she been silenced from speaking about the conservatorship or other topics before? Yes. Obviously press access to her has been limited and there are anecdotes from reporters saying they must ask questions within a certain parameter. Have we ever questioned the authenticity of what she posted on Instagram in 2014-2018? No. Obviously her post about taking "me time" is what set off the craze around her Instagram, and her account was likely managed for most of 2019 and 2020. But we never questioned or scrutinized her posts before that point. And since her court testimony, it appears that she has gained some form of control in the messaging.

Do we have solid evidence that shows she does have complete control or input of her Instagram? No!  Do we have evidence showing that she has absolutely no control or input of her Instagram? No!

[nthenwkiss]

Just now, danny1994 said:

I’m all for this thread. I think skepticism is healthy, but sometimes we go full Alex Jones tin foil hat. Let’s try to investigate while at the same time being logical. We do the movement no good if we make accusations without evidence to back it up.

this are words to live by. thank you.

[SlayOut]

4 minutes ago, MARKUS said:

"The Internet's home base to discuss Britney Spears, the Free Britney movement, the conservatorship, her iconic rise to fame and what's next for the princess of pop. " 

Thats Exhales own description. In it you might find somethings as facts, someones opinion that might be a fact, some "facts"  that actually will be disapproved later and some theories that could go either way.  

An opinion, by definition, is not a fact. They can be based on fact, but that relies on the facts the opinion is based off of.

https://www.bmcc.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/ported/lrc/studyskills/factsandopinions.pdf

[nthenwkiss]

3 minutes ago, SlayOut said:

Again, there is already a thread made especially for people who believe Britney does not control her Instagram, and I do not want to derail this thread with a conversation that can easily happen in that thread.

I've shared my perspective before, that I believe Britney has some say over what is posted. Why would Team Con approve of captions that mention the word "conservatorship", that shade Jamie Lynn, or that use the #FreeBritney hashtag? 

Do I think she's sitting on her couch typing up captions in the IG app and pressing post herself? No. Most celebrities have a communications or social media team to do that. Has she been silenced from speaking about the conservatorship or other topics before? Yes. Obviously press access to her has been limited and there are anecdotes from reporters saying they must ask questions within a certain parameter. Have we ever questioned the authenticity of what she posted on Instagram in 2014-2018? No. Obviously her post about taking "me time" is what set off the craze around her Instagram, and her account was likely managed for most of 2019 and 2020. But we never questioned or scrutinized her posts before that point. And since her court testimony, it appears that she has gained some form of control in the messaging.

Do we have solid evidence that shows she does have complete control or input of her Instagram? No!  Do we have evidence showing that she has absolutely no control or input of her Instagram? No!

but i think everyone in this forum agrees with that you are saying!!! that is reality - we don't have proof of either, so yes it doesn't make sense to take either side as true but people can have opinions about what they speculate can be true.

[RadicalOptimism]

How much prentice paying you sis? 

[MARKUS]

-

[Lucian85]

I really hope this thread will not be used to bully fellow Britney fans who have doubts and trust issues. 

[SlayOut]

Just now, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

How much prentice paying you sis? 

Sis.  I reject the Team Con label you're putting on me.

[MARKUS]

-

[Anti-Hero]

31 minutes ago, Matou said:

Ok

You missed the biggest one, does Britney control her IG ? Y'all should post what made you believe it's 100% her

For me it's not that I believe it's 100% her, we just don't have proof one way or the other if she's posting or not. So it's a matter of not reaching a conclusion because there's no evidence. Not jumping to conclusions.

[SlayOut]

2 minutes ago, Lucian85 said:

I really hope this thread will not be used to bully fellow Britney fans who have doubts and trust issues. 

I put this at the end of the original post:

Quote

Remember, this is a thread meant to generate conversation and propose solutions for limiting the spread of misinformation. Please do not attack other members who, in your eyes, may have or actively do participate in this behavior.

I will definitely monitor this thread for that kind of behavior, and make a report when needed. You can do that as well.

[RadicalOptimism]

1 minute ago, SlayOut said:

Sis.  I reject the Team Con label you're putting on me.

I was with you until your third point. I don’t see why people calling him out is bad. It’s justified considering he’s inserting himself into something he shouldn’t regardless of what’s being said about the case. I don’t condone racist comments, but I mean just because one or two ********* said something like that about him doesn’t mean people can’t criticize him 

[nthenwkiss]

1 minute ago, MARKUS said:

How is it not?

no man, i don think it is, be open here - there are some stupid things thrown around, but yes, its not crazy to consider most of them possible. so i get the OP, but i also think its healthy to question within reason.

[SlayOut]

7 minutes ago, danny1994 said:

I’m all for this thread. I think skepticism is healthy, but sometimes we go full Alex Jones tin foil hat. Let’s try to investigate while at the same time being logical. We do the movement no good if we make accusations without evidence to back it up.

Thank you for this. I am not saying people are not allowed to be skeptical, and I'm definitely not trying to gatekeep what can and cannot be discussed. What I do have an issue with is the people that spread theories not based on fact and treat them as 100% fact. Which then snowballs into further threads or judgements from some members that aren't based on fact or for genuine dialogue.

[Lucian85]

46 minutes ago, SlayOut said:

Remember, this is a thread meant to generate conversation and propose solutions for limiting the spread of misinformation. 

What is misinformation ? 

For something to be misinformation, it has to be completely debunked with proofs. Otherwise it's still a legitimate theory. 

[SlayOut]

2 minutes ago, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

I was with you until your third point. I don’t see why people calling him out is bad. It’s justified considering he’s inserting himself into something he shouldn’t regardless of what’s being said about the case. I don’t condone racist comments, but I mean just because one or two ********* said something like that about him doesn’t mean people can’t criticize him 

People have claimed, without evidence, that his entire career is based on him profiting off of the conservatorship or that fact that his mother is a Superior Court Judge in Los Angeles. Which does not make sense to begin with since his career has lasted longer than her being a judge.

Sure, he could and should refrain from posting on Twitter. But people act like harassing him will accomplish something of significance for the conservatorship. Which does not make sense to me.

[Anti-Hero]

7 minutes ago, SlayOut said:

Thank you for this. I am not saying people are not allowed to be skeptical, and I'm definitely not trying to gatekeep what can and cannot be discussed. What I do have an issue with is the people that spread theories not based on fact and treat them as 100% fact. Which then snowballs into further threads or judgements from some members that aren't based on fact or for genuine dialogue.

That Kanye lawyer Christopher Melcher has been making videos lately and gives advice about the Free Britney movement, and talks about how fans should behave. Here's a graphic I screenshotted from one of his videos that I think we should take seriously, he's a lawyer, he knows his stuff-

[Stefani]

By any chance, are you being paid by Team Con?  The only conspiracy theory that I believe right now is the Instagram thing, but it's getting harder to tell if someone else is running that account given the posts in recent weeks that seem to indicate Britney's involvement. 

[nthenwkiss]

1 minute ago, danny1994 said:

That Kanye lawyer Christopher Melcher had been making videos lately and gives advice about the Free Britney movement, and talks about how fans should behave. Here's a graphic I screenshotted from one of his videos that I think we should take seriously, he's a lawyer, he knows his stuff-

100% behind this.

[Easy There]

Daily reminder that most of FreeBritney claims were considered conspiracy theory not so long ago. And most and even more shocking things were confirmed by Britney herself.

 

So awww at this thread