Blog Layout

Piece of Me: How a Greedy Media Cashed in on Stigma, Helping to Seal Britney’s Fate

Piece of Me~Britney Spears (2007) Exc.


Tryin' and pissin' me off
Well get in line with the paparazzi
Who's flippin' me off
Hopin' I'll resort to startin' havoc
And end up settlin' in court
Now are you sure you want a piece of me?



How have we not talked about Britney yet, y'all? If you're not familiar with the #FreeBritney movement by now, it might be time to come out from under that rock, LOL, but I'll try to get you up to speed…


The hashtag #FreeBritney first appeared over a decade ago, roughly a year after Britney's father, Jamie, petitioned the court to control his daughter's financial, medical, and personal affairs, citing concerns over Britney's mental health.


Throughout the thirteen years that Britney's father has been her conservator, she's put out several albums, toured the world, appeared as a judge on The X Factor, and completed a Las Vegas residency grossing 138 million dollars. 


The pop star is worth sixty million bucks but lives on a fixed monthly allowance and has limited autonomy. Meanwhile, Mr. Spears and a few co-conservators profit off the arrangement.


Something about the situation certainly seemed sus, but Britney herself rarely made mention of it until recently. When concerned fans took it upon themselves to investigate, the #FreeBritney movement was born. It's since gone viral on social media, spawned a petition to the White House, and produced hundreds of picketers with pink signs outside the LA courthouse.


Last February, the documentary "Framing Britney Spears" highlighted the movement and may have empowered Britney to finally speak up. Because in June, thirty-nine-year-old Britney broke her silence, asking the court to end the conservatorship and confirming several of the "conspiracy theories" about exploitation and abuse under the arrangement. She spoke for over twenty heartbreaking minutes detailing her frustrations.


On August 12th, her father agreed to step down from his role as conservator. While this doesn't yet grant Brit independence, she'd been adamant about removing her father for some time, so it's a step in an optimistic direction.


Reviewing the events that led to Britney losing her children and personhood, I was struck by the role the media and paparazzi played in her public "breakdown." It was easy back then to get sucked into tabloids that sold us the train wreck, party girl story, but what was really going on with Britney?



In 2007, her marriage to Kevin Federline ended, and the ensuing custody battle over her two little boys sent her into a tailspin. Her youngest son was still nursing when Britney's visitation rights were limited. 


Some close to the singer speculate she was suffering from postpartum depression, a theory that was apparently never investigated. She sought solace in drugs and alcohol, further jeopardizing her parental rights. 


The paparazzi were relentless as she unraveled, and their constant surveillance and interrogation only fueled her infamous outbursts.


Most vividly remember the moment she shaved her signature blonde locks off as greedy photogs snapped away, eager to capitalize on a young woman's suffering. The incident followed Federline refusing to let Britney see her children. It's no wonder she ended up taking an umbrella to a pap's car.


A standoff with police (when she refused to relinquish custody of her son Jayden) ended with a 5150 psychiatric hold. It was then that her father petitioned the court for legal authority over her affairs. 


Parents always worry about the choices their kids are making, and Britney's immense fame and wealth gave her unlimited opportunities to f-up. The need for intervention at the time was clear, especially with children in the picture. Was such an extreme measure warranted, though? And is it still justified after all these years?


Britney is clearly capable of quite a lot. Millions of dollars’ worth of quite a lot. And when the team that decides whether or not she will work are also beneficiaries of said work, can they act purely in her best interests? And what are her best interests, anyway?


The conservatorship was said to be temporary at the outset. Still, the arrangement was extended year after year, long after the media and general public lost interest in every sordid detail of Britney's life.


Who knows what Britney's life and legacy would look like without the restraints of her conservatorship? Some point to her sixty-million-dollar fortune as proof the arrangement has been good for her. But the only person who truly knows what's good for Britney is Britney. 


That's the thing with civil rights. We all get to choose our good, no matter how bad it might look to someone else.



The media's constant antagonization and character assassination compounded the pressures of being in the public eye, the breakdown of her family, and any mental health challenges she may (or may not) have been experiencing. Sadly, she was an easy mark for an industry that knows exactly what it takes to cash in.


A decade later, our society seems more sensitive to mental health struggles and the general human condition. We've seen more of it, or we're more informed, perhaps. Stars like Kanye West, Demi Lovato, and Olympian Simone Biles have struggled publicly without becoming the butt of insensitive jokes. Certainly not to the degree we saw with Britney, Lindsay, or Amanda. 


New laws in California have reigned in the paparazzi a bit, and social media has changed their role tremendously, too. But Ms. Spears' situation is a stark reminder of why we all need to keep doing better. 


Now can we #FreeBritney already?


XO,

Dina B.

Share by: