Harvard Political Review : Toxic: The Media’s War on Britney Spears

[Moscow]

It was Britney’s world, and we were just living in it. From the very inception of her career in the late 90s, Britney Jean Spears dominated the music scene with her first hit, “…Baby One More Time,” topping the charts for 32 weeks and remaining today as one of the most popular singles ever sold. From there, she continued to shatter records and became platinum-certified on several of her albums. 

These halcyon days soon came to a screeching halt after a cascade of troubling and trying events unraveled. Being thrusted into the limelight often meant invasive, personal questioning from a media that hadn’t, and still hasn’t, treated female celebrities equitably. The crazed and hungry paparazzi tracked her every movement, vying for the perfect photo op to fuel the tabloids and press. This drama came to a head in 2007, with the infamous photos of Britney shaving her head and using an umbrella to shatter the car windows of paparazzi. Soon after, she checked into a rehabilitation center, and her life has not been the same since: Following the events of 2007, her mental health deteriorated in her conservatorship under her father, Jamie Spears. According to the California Court Systems, “A conservatorship is a court case where a judge appoints a responsible person or organization (called the “conservator”) to care for another adult (called the “conservatee”) who cannot care for himself or herself or manage his or her own finances.” This means Spears is supposedly unable to spend her own money, see her two sons, leave her house, drive a car, or even receive unapproved visitors without explicit consent and permission from her father.

Britney’s extremely high-profile conservatorship is unusual for several reasons. First, a conservatorship often serves as a last resort for significantly older persons, and as a 39-year-old woman, Spears is a particularly young candidate. In addition, Spears’ father has always insisted that the conservatorship is in the best interest of his daughter, but Britney’s actions seem to speak otherwise, given that she requested the courts remove him as conservator multiple times over the years and within the last two weeks declared her intent to end her conservatorship to a Los Angeles Superior Court judge in a hearing that provided no concrete resolution. Finally, there seems to be a clear financial stake in Britney’s monetary assets: With a net worth of over $60 million, there is a compelling incentive for her father to continue to manage her financial interests and estate. 

Spears’s life and her conservatorship have recently undergone revitalized scrutiny thanks to the New York Times documentary“Framing Britney Spears.” Following the release of the documentary, the #FreeBritney movement, which advocates for Britney’s legal liberation from her father and renewal of her ability to make personal, professional, and financial decisions for herself, has taken the world by storm. This, of course, begs the question: Who, or what, are we freeing Britney from? Why is she not free in the first place, and what can we do to help her escape her plight? 

Given the complex, multifaceted nature of her life under this conservatorship, it is crucial to analyze the factors culminating in this legal agreement, examine what her current decision-making abilities look like, and learn how present social media movements seek to liberate her. While the media has certainly put the spotlight on the #FreeBritney movement, they were also responsible for — and continue to be responsible for —  depriving her of any sense of privacy, hyper***ualizing her body and identity, and subjecting her to unequal gender standards as a young female entertainer. On a larger level, this speaks to the “new normal” of the media – acting both as a mouthpiece to advocate for the marginalized and vulnerable, while simultaneously casting a harsh spotlight and exploiting the personal, intimate lives of celebrities for monetary gain. However, the inherent nature of both traditional media and social media, one that scrutinizes the livelihoods of celebrities, still exercises a form of control over Britney, even from fans with good intentions.

Britney’s Past: She’s so Lucky, She’s a Star?

In the early 2000s, the media’s s**ist culture permeated magazines, television interviews, and the radio, often objectifying up-and-coming female stars in their 20s. While this trend has continued, the media culture of the early 2000s still poses a stark contrast to that of today. Women were seldom portrayed on magazine covers, but when they were, they were often scantily clad in lingerie or comparable attire, fueling a “raunch” culture specifically targeting young women. Within this media culture, celebrities like Britney Spears, Lindsey Lohan, and Christina Aguilera suffered from the imbalanced power dynamics of a male-dominated industry that acted as gatekeepers to their fame and success. 

Speaking specifically on Britney’s treatment, the media was guilty of two primary transgressions. First, media outlets from the early 2000s were responsible for perpetuating double standards against young women, expecting the picture of naivety and innocence from Britney Spears, and instead portraying her fun-loving, playful self as a promiscuous being who acted and looked beyond her age. Related to this portrayal was the notion that, because of her immense prominence and massive amounts of social and cultural capital, she was forced to play defense on nearly every facet of her life that was exposed to the public eye. Britney’s party decisions, parental choices, and wardrobe were all scrutinized and criticized by the media. Being stalked day and night by paparazzi, she effectively lost any sense of privacy and was constantly vilified, which took a toll on her wellbeing and culminated in her hair shaving incident, attack on a reporter’s car, and subsequent conservatorship.

The media has often played an influential role in pop culture, determining who receives airtime and portraying celebrities in a certain light. While Britney accelerated to stardom partly due to her constant presence in mass media, the very same forces that launched her career also sought to bring her down by tearing apart her seemingly naive personality and reassembling her as an over***ualized, troubled pop star. While it is highly unlikely that the media would now ask women about their virginity status, there remains a gendered treatment of female celebrities, evident in the level of scrutiny surrounding their body sizes and weight changes, clothing choices, and personal lives — scrutiny which does not apply to men to nearly the same extent. 

Ultimately, the media has served as a contradictory force in Britney’s life — it has driven her toward fame and fortune, but it has also crafted a narrative that spun wildly out of control and chipped away at Britney’s ability to define her own identity. But there now appears to be an opportunity for change; Britney and her multitude of fans have now harnessed the power of social media to help her reclaim her power. 

Britney’s Present: Us Against the World?

Due to the conservatorship, Britney had previously remained tight-lipped during her years-long legal battle for her freedom and independence, though it is uncertain whether this is voluntary. However, in the “Framing Britney Spears” documentary, some fans speculate that Britney has used her social media accounts, such as Instagram posts, to send cryptic messages that are potentially seeking help. As anger, resentment, and confusion rise around the existence of Britney’s conservatorship, a growing number of adoring fans have taken to social media to advocate for Britney’s liberation in a movement known as #FreeBritney. 

In a nutshell, the #FreeBritney movement was created with the intention of generating awareness around Britney’s unusual conservatorship and advocating for her immediate freedom. The Twitter hashtag soon caught fire and gained traction in April 2019 after an anonymous paralegal cited concerns over her father’s control in the Britney’s Gram podcast, a show hosted by two celebrity comedians. This movement has now attracted the attention of numerous celebrities as well as thousands of loyal fans to seek to liberate their pop icon. There has even been a petition sent to the White House with over 100,000 signatures demanding the immediate liberation of Britney Spears.

I recently spoke with Sarah June, a Lowell House Resident Tutor, long-time fanatic of Britney Spears, and a fervent advocate of the #FreeBritney movement for several years. Equipped with years of research and investigation into Britney’s life, Sarah’s perspective illuminates the various viewpoints followers of the #FreeBritney movement took on. Some believe in conspiracy theories that she has been drugged and forced against her will to make public appearances, perform for live audiences, and make cryptic social media posts; others speculate that she has been  messing with the public all these years, given her bubbly and silly personality evident from interviews in the early 2000s.

However, Sarah believes that the formation and perpetuity of the conservatorship can be explained by two main factors. First, Britney, as a young female pop star, had been taken advantage of by close family members and the media for both financial exploitation and personal gain. Second, lapses in understanding of mental health at the time permitted the invasive and inhumane treatment of her from the paparazzi and media, which led to judgments of her competencies without a thorough understanding of her personal circumstances.  As such, there is a hypocritical nature in how current news media interacts with Britney: Though social media has been integral to raising awareness of Britney’s legal circumstances, the current interactions between the #FreeBritney movement and the media continue to publicize her mental breakdowns and downward spirals. Thus, it comes to no surprise that Britney herself reported “crying for weeks” over the release of the documentary that rereleased much of her trauma and pitied her on her personal and professional pitfalls. At the end of the day, #FreeBritney is driven by the collective passion of adoring fans who want to free her from her conservatorship, but does this well-intentioned yet constant spotlight on Britney perpetuate another form of control, robbing her of her autonomy once again?

Thus, while the media has facilitated the comprehension of Britney’s plight, it has simultaneously forced her to potentially relive past trauma. It is apparent that social media is influential in spreading awareness of social justice and advocacy but has also led to the proliferation of harmful content, such as misinformation and fringe theories. News outlets and documentaries continue to disseminate information regarding the unusual case of Britney’s conservatorship, but this serves as a constant reminder of how the media has consistently preyed on Britney, both in the past as a rising pop star, and in the present as a victim of her circumstances. In other words, are those who support #FreeBritney  really aiding Britney in her fight for freedom by highlighting her rock bottom all over again?

Britney’s Future: Stronger

Britney was, and still is, one of the defining artists of her time — nonetheless, much of what we and the public know about Britney Spears remains shrouded in mystery. Treating Britney and her life with respect remains critical — otherwise, we run the risk of repeating the mistakes of the early 2000s. We must reconcile with the fact that the ever-growing presence of the media — both in traditional outlets and modern social media platforms — has granted a platform to the #FreeBritney movement while also perpetuating the heightened scrutiny and judgment Britney Spears has endured throughout her decades-long career. In other words, while social media literally made #FreeBritney possible, the movement should not further victimize Britney but instead seek to empower her financially, professionally, and personally. Ultimately, we must carry on the hard lessons that we learned on the media’s potent impact on an individual’s mental wellbeing —  for Britney and for the young female celebrities to come.

 More than anything, Spears’ portrayal in the media has larger implications on how female celebrities are depicted and framed to the public. #FreeBritney drew attention to the double standard that famous women often face, and it subsequently catalyzed a social movement to help women “take back” their own lives. In wake of Spears’ ever-evolving legal situation and the sustained growth of the #FreeBritney movement online, we must ask ourselves: What is the new normal for Britney Spears as her life reemerges in the limelight? As social media democratizes the media landscape, will we see the dissolution of gendered treatment against women celebrities? Will we ever see her liberated from her conservatorship and finally able to reclaim autonomy over her children, financial assets, and wellbeing? While the answers to these questions have yet to be determined, don’t let me be the last to know. 

Article link

 

[Moscow]

I loved reading this one, if anyone here is a reader should give it a try I loved the article. 

[canyouhandlemytruth]

deleted

[Kletus]

They spelled Lindsay Lohan wrong 

but I love the article 

[Moscow]

37 minutes ago, canyouhandlemytruth said:

deleted

deleted what? 

[DollyParton]

1 hour ago, Prachi said:

deleted what? 

probably it own post. 

[Oxic]

the end lol

[Ghoulia]

Thank you! This was a good article. Not new information but an articulate summary of the #freebritney movement and the fans