More stories

  • in

    Au tribunal, Britney Spears demande la levée de sa tutelle.

    Lors d’une déclaration publique exceptionnelle au tribunal de Los Angeles, la chanteuse a prononcé un discours passionné sur la tutelle qui contrôle sa vie et demandé qu’elle soit levée.La vie et les finances de Britney Spears sont sous tutelle depuis 2008. Mercredi, au tribunal, elle a déclaré vouloir mettre fin à cet état de fait.Mario Anzuoni/ReutersThe New York Times traduit en français une sélection de ses meilleurs articles. Retrouvez-les ici.Britney Spears a déclaré mercredi à une juge de Los Angeles qu’elle a été droguée, obligée de travailler contre son gré et empêchée de retirer son dispositif de contraception au cours des 13 dernières années, et a plaidé auprès du tribunal qu’il mette fin au contrôle légal de sa vie par son père.“J’étais dans le déni. J’étais en état de choc. Je suis traumatisée”, a dit Britney Spears, 39 ans, dans une déclaration émouvante de 23 minutes diffusée par téléphone dans la salle d’audience et, comme elle l’a demandé, au public. “Je veux juste qu’on me rende ma vie”.C’était la première fois que le monde entendait Britney Spears évoquer en détail ses difficultés avec la tutelle accordée en 2008 à son père, James P. Spears, qui, inquiet pour la santé mentale et potentielle toxicomanie de sa fille, avait demandé au tribunal à exercer une autorité légale sur sa fille adulte.Britney Spears a plaidé pour que la tutelle prenne fin sans qu’elle “ait à être évaluée”. “Je ne devrais pas être sous tutelle alors que je suis capable de travailler. Les lois doivent changer”, a-t-elle insisté. “Je considère vraiment cette tutelle abusive. Je n’ai pas le sentiment de pouvoir pleinement vivre ma vie.”Le conflit qui oppose l’une des plus grandes pop stars mondiale à son père est une longue saga qui a vu naître le mouvement mondial ‘Free Britney’ parmi ses fans et d’autres célébrités.À l’extérieur de la salle d’audience, une foule d’environ 120 sympathisants venus soutenir la chanteuse s’est tue pour écouter sa voix sur leurs téléphones.Ce rebondissement est intervenu après qu’en avril l’avocat commis d’office de Britney Spears, Samuel D. Ingham III, a déposé une requête, à sa demande, afin qu’elle soit autorisée — en procédure accélérée — à s’adresser directement à la juge. D’après des documents judiciaires confidentiels obtenus récemment par le New York Times, Mme Spears avait soulevé dès 2014 des problèmes relatifs au rôle de son père dans la tutelle, et avait demandé sa levée à plusieurs reprises, bien que M. Ingham n’ait pas demandé à le faire.“Ce que j’ai vécu me fait honte et me déprime, et c’est la principale raison pour laquelle je n’en parlais pas ouvertement “, a indiqué Britney Spears. “Je pensais que personne ne me croirait.” Elle a ajouté qu’elle ne savait pas qu’elle pouvait demander la fin de la tutelle. “Je suis navrée de mon ignorance”, a-t-elle dit, “mais je ne le savais pas”.La chanteuse s’exprimait à partir de notes préparées à l’avance, parlant si vite et de façon si passionnée que la juge a dû plusieurs fois lui demander de ralentir pour les besoins de son greffier.“Je vous dis la vérité là, OK ?” a-t-elle dit . “Je ne suis pas heureuse. Je n’arrive pas à dormir. Je suis tellement en colère, c’est du délire.”Les fans de Britney Spears devant le palais de justice de Los Angeles mercredi en prévision de l’audience de la star.Allison Zaucha for The New York TimesLa chanteuse vit en Californie sous une double tutelle — couvrant à la fois sa personne et sa fortune — depuis 2008, date à laquelle son père, inquiet de sa santé mentale et de son éventuelle toxicomanie, avait saisi le tribunal pour obtenir l’autorité sur sa fille.M. Spears, 68 ans, supervise actuellement la fortune de près de 60 millions de dollars de Britney Spears, aux côtés d’une société de gestion de patrimoine professionnelle qu’elle a sollicitée; depuis 2019, un administrateur professionnel agréé prend en charge les soins personnels de Britney Spears sur une base temporaire toujours en cours.D’après des représentants de M. Spears et de la tutelle, il était nécessaire de protéger Britney Spears, et elle pouvait demander la fin de la tutelle quand elle le souhaitait.Mais la star a dit qu’elle s’est sentie contrainte de s’adresser de nouveau à la juge chargée de l’affaire, Brenda Penny, après avoir récemment pris position contre sa mise sous tutelle lors d’une audience à huis clos en mai 2019. “Je ne pense pas avoir été entendue à quelque niveau que ce soit la dernière fois que je suis venue au tribunal”, a-t-elle lancé avant de résumer ses précédentes remarques, affirmant notamment qu’elle avait été forcée en 2019 de partir en tournée, de subir des évaluations psychiatriques et de prendre des médicaments. “Ceux qui m’ont fait ça, on ne devrait pas les laisser partir si facilement”, a-t-elle asséné.Elle a raconté qu’après avoir donné son avis pendant des répétitions en vue d’une résidence à Las Vegas, annulée par la suite, on l’a contrainte à subir des évaluations médicales et une cure de désintoxication. Quand elle s’est opposée à un bout de chorégraphie, “c’était comme si j’avais posé une énorme bombe quelque part”, a-t-elle décrit, ajoutant: “Je ne suis pas là pour être l’esclave de qui que ce soit. Je peux dire non à un pas de danse”.“J’ai besoin de votre aide”, a-t-elle déclaré à la juge. “Je ne veux pas qu’on m’asseye dans une pièce pendant des heures par jour comme ils l’ont fait. Ils n’ont fait qu’empirer les choses pour moi.”Plusieurs fois, Britney Spears a fait remarquer qu’elle était en mesure de “faire vivre tant de personnes et de rémunérer tant de personnes”, alors qu’elle ne contrôlait pas ses propres finances. “Je suis excellente dans ce que je fais”, a-t-elle affirmé. “Et je permets à ces gens d’avoir le contrôle sur ce que je fais, Madame, et ça suffit. Ça n’a aucun sens.”Cela fait plusieurs années que les fans et les commentateurs s’interrogent sur le fait que Britney Spears réponde encore aux critères d’une mise sous tutelle, celle-ci étant typiquement un dernier recours pour des personnes qui ne peuvent pas s’occuper d’elles-mêmes, y compris celles souffrant de handicaps graves ou de démence. Jusqu’à récemment, la chanteuse a continué à se produire et à rapporter des millions de dollars dans le cadre de cet accord.Robbyn de la Fuente et ses enfants attendent l’audition de Britney Spears devant le tribunal de Los Angeles mercredi.Allison Zaucha for The New York TimesMercredi, à l’extérieur du tribunal du centre-ville de Los Angeles, des dizaines de fervents partisans de la chanteuse ralliés sous la bannière #FreeBritney s’étaient rassemblés devant un fond rose fluo pour chanter et prononcer des discours dénonçant l’injustice de sa situation. Certains fans disaient avoir fait le voyage depuis Las Vegas et Détroit. Les représentants des médias étant encore plus nombreux, la foule avait gonflé jusqu’à occuper tout un pâté de maisons.Des participants plus âgés s’étaient également joints aux fans de la chanteuse, voyant dans le cas Britney Spears l’occasion d’attirer l’attention sur un système de tutelle en mal de réforme. “Quand on a entendu parler de ce groupe de jeunes animés d’une conscience sociale, on y a vu une opportunité d’éduquer les Américains”, explique Susan Cobianchi, 61 ans, qui a rejoint le contingent #FreeBritney au début de l’année, après le décès de sa mère dont la tutelle les avait tenus éloignées dans ses derniers jours.En 2016, Britney Spears a fait savoir à un enquêteur judiciaire chargé de son dossier qu’elle souhaitait que la tutelle prenne fin le plus rapidement possible, selon les documents signalés par le New York Times. “Elle a précisé qu’elle avait le sentiment que la mise sous tutelle était devenue un outil d’oppression et de contrôle à son encontre”, a écrit l’enquêteur. “Elle ‘en a marre qu’on profite d’elle’ et elle dit que c’est elle qui travaille et gagne son argent mais qu’elle paie tous ceux qui l’entourent”.À l’époque, l’enquêteur, qui est chargé de fournir des évaluations régulières au juge, a conclu que la mise sous tutelle restait dans le meilleur intérêt de la star en raison de la complexité de ses finances, de sa vulnérabilité aux influences néfastes et de ses problèmes de drogue “intermittents”. Mais le rapport préconisait également “un passage vers l’indépendance et la fin à terme de la mise sous tutelle”.Mercredi, la chanteuse a invoqué l’autorité de son père, le qualifiant de “celui qui approuve tout cela”, et a décrit comment lui et son équipe de direction l’ont intimidée et punie. “Ils méritent d’être en prison”, a-t-elle déclaré. Elle a également mentionné vouloir poursuivre sa famille en justice.Après ces remarques, Vivian Lee Thoreen, une des avocates de M. Spears, a demandé une suspension d’audience puis lu une courte déclaration au nom de son client : “Il est désolé de voir sa fille souffrir et éprouver tant de douleur”, a-t-elle lu. “M. Spears aime sa fille, et elle lui manque beaucoup”.Réunis devant le tribunal, Junior Olivas et d’autres fans de Britney Spears réagissent aux déclarations de la star au sujet de sa mise sous tutelle.Allison Zaucha for The New York TimesM. Ingham, qui a indiqué au début de l’audience qu’il ignorait ce que Mme Spears allait dire, semblait tout aussi stupéfait. Il a dit qu’il servait au gré de la cour, et qu’il se retirerait comme représentant de Britney Spears si on le lui demandait.“Étant donné qu’elle a fait les remarques qu’elle a pu faire en public aujourd’hui, elle estime qu’il serait souhaitable que les audiences se tiennent à huis-clos à l’avenir”, a déclaré M. Ingham. Une autre audience avait déjà été programmée pour le mois de juillet, mais la suite exacte des événements n’est pas encore claire.Si le parcours juridique à venir de la chanteuse risque d’être compliqué, les souhaits qu’elle a exprimés sont plus simples. Elle voudrait pouvoir se faire coiffer et se faire faire les ongles librement, a-t-elle dit, et pouvoir rendre visite à des amis qui vivent à “huit minutes de chez elle”.Elle préfère mettre sa foi en Dieu, a-t-elle dit, mais elle n’est pas opposée à un traitement à condition qu’il reste confidentiel. “Je sais que j’ai besoin d’un peu de thérapie”, a-t-elle admis avec un petit rire.Mais la mise sous tutelle “me fait beaucoup plus de mal que de bien”, a-t-elle ajouté. “Je mérite d’avoir une vie.”Mme Spears a raconté qu’on l’avait même empêchée d’aller chez le médecin faire retirer son stérilet, sa méthode de contraception : “Cette soi-disant équipe ne me laisse pas aller chez le médecin pour le retirer parce qu’ils ne veulent pas que j’aie d’enfants”, s’est-elle emportée.“Je veux pouvoir me marier et avoir un bébé”, a plaidé la chanteuse. “On m’a dit que là, mise sous tutelle, je ne suis pas en mesure de me marier et d’avoir un bébé”.Un peu plus tôt, Mme Spears avait déclaré qu’elle était “finie”. “Tout ce que je veux, c’est disposer de mon argent, que tout cela se termine et que je puisse faire un tour avec mon petit ami dans sa voiture”, a-t-elle déclaré, agrémentant son souhait d’un gros mot.Caryn Ganz et Liz Day ont contribué au reportage depuis New York. Lauren Herstik et Samantha Stark y ont contribué depuis Los Angeles.Regarder “Framing Britney Spears” (en anglais)Notre documentaire sur Britney Spears et sa bataille judiciaire avec son père pour le contrôle de sa fortune est gratuit sur notre site pour les abonnés du New York Times aux États-Unis. Regardez-le maintenant.Watch The New York Times documentary about Britney Spears and her court battle with her father over control of her career and her fortune. The full video is streaming on Hulu and free on our site for Times subscribers in the United States.Ting-Li Wang/The New York Times More

  • in

    Mariah Carey Urges Britney Spears to 'Stay Strong' on Twitter

    As Britney Spears made an anguished speech in court about the control exerted over her life for years, fans, observers and fellow pop stars responded with shock to the details that trickled out from the hearing in Los Angeles, sending messages of support and solidarity.In the hearing, Ms. Spears said she believed that the conservatorship — a legal arrangement that controls her personal life and finances — was “abusive” and that she had not been able to live a full life. Midway through Wednesday’s hearing, after Ms. Spears had finished her prepared testimony, the singer Mariah Carey urged her to “stay strong.”We love you Britney!!! Stay strong ❤️❤️❤️— Mariah Carey (@MariahCarey) June 23, 2021
    Devoted fans on social media who have long suspected that Ms. Spears was not happy with the arrangement commended Ms. Spears for speaking up and reacted with disgust to parts of her account.Ms. Spears also received supportive words on social media from the singers Brandy, Tinashe and Liz Phair, who wrote that declaring a woman “mad” to gain control of her assets was the “oldest trick in the playbook of the patriarchy.” The singer Halsey wrote on Twitter that she admired Ms. Spears’s courage in speaking up and hoped that she would be freed from the “abusive system.” More

  • in

    Britney Spears Told Court She Wanted Her IUD Removed

    One of the most explosive details in Britney Spears’s testimony on Wednesday came when she said that the people who control her affairs had refused to allow her to get her IUD removed so that she could try to have a third child.“I want to be able to get married and have a baby,” Ms. Spears said. “I was told right now in the conservatorship I am not able to get married or have a baby.”She told the court that she wanted to remove the birth control device “so I could start trying to have another baby, but this so-called team won’t let me go to the doctor to take it out because they don’t want me to have children, any more children.”Ms. Spears has two teenage sons with her ex-husband Kevin Federline. Her current boyfriend, Sam Asghari, had spoken publicly in opposition to Ms. Spears’s arrangement even when she remained relatively silent. Before the hearing on Wednesday, he posted a photo to Instagram of him wearing a shirt with the phrase #FreeBritney.Alexis McGill Johnson, president and chief executive of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, weighed in on Twitter, calling Ms. Spears’s account “reproductive coercion.” More

  • in

    Britney Spears Asks to Address Court Overseeing Her Conservatorship

    A lawyer for the singer told the judge presiding in her case that Spears was seeking to speak to the court on an “expedited basis.”Britney Spears has something to say.After years of relative silence regarding the court-approved conservatorship that has controlled much of her life since 2008, a lawyer for the pop singer requested on Tuesday that Spears be allowed to speak at a hearing soon.“The conservatee has requested that I seek from the court a status hearing at which she can address the court directly,” Samuel D. Ingham III, the court-appointed lawyer who represents Spears in her conservatorship, asked the judge overseeing the case. He proposed that the hearing be scheduled on an “expedited basis,” preferably within 30 days.The judge, Brenda Penny, agreed, and she set the hearing regarding the status of the conservatorship for June 23. An additional hearing in the case was scheduled for July.The request on behalf of Spears came during a remote virtual meeting in the case that mostly amounted to housekeeping between lawyers. But the possibility that the typically shrouded pop star would address the court represented a shift for Spears, who has rarely commented on the case for more than a decade.It would mark the first time Spears has done so in court since seeking substantial changes to the conservatorship, including the removal of her father, Jamie Spears, from what had been a leading role in the arrangement.For years, fans and observers have questioned why the singer was in a conservatorship, sometimes known as a guardianship, at all, with some arguing that she was being held against her will or taken advantage of. Conservatorships are typically reserved for the very ill, old or infirm, but Spears continued to perform and bring in millions of dollars.Conversation around Spears’s situation — fueled in part by the fans calling themselves the #FreeBritney movement — picked up earlier this year following the release of “Framing Britney Spears,” a TV documentary by The New York Times.Spears has been in a conservatorship for 13 years, following a prolonged public breakdown that required multiple hospitalizations. Her exact medical diagnosis is not known.Outside of the courtroom, Spears has referred only obliquely to her legal situation, assuring fans concerned about her well-being that she was “totally fine.”“I’m extremely happy, I have a beautiful home, beautiful children,” Spears said on Instagram this month. “I’m taking a break right now because I’m enjoying myself.”Things have been more contentious in court filings, where Ingham has said that Spears was “strongly opposed” to her father returning as her personal conservator.Jamie Spears currently serves as a co-conservator of his daughter’s estate, helping to oversee her finances alongside Bessemer Trust, a corporate fiduciary. Previously, Jamie had also served as Britney’s personal conservator, helping to arrange her medical and mental health care, security and more. He stepped down from that role in September 2019, citing health problems.The singer had requested that Jodi Montgomery, a licensed professional conservator, remain in the role that she has held temporarily since 2019. Ingham has said that Spears was “afraid of her father,” and would not perform if he remained in charge.Spears’s mother, Lynne, has also raised questions regarding $890,000 in legal fees for Jamie Spears, which her lawyers have called “procedurally improper” and “utterly excessive.” (Lawyers for Jamie Spears responded: “She has not been involved in her daughter’s conservatorship until very recently, and she is now raising objections to fees related to matters that she has no knowledge of.”)Vivian Lee Thoreen, a lawyer for Jamie Spears, has said that the singer’s father “diligently and professionally carried out his duties,” and that his daughter’s safety was his top priority.Jamie Spears “would love nothing more than to see Britney not need a conservatorship,” Thoreen said in March.“Whether or not there is an end to the conservatorship really depends on Britney,” she added. “If she wants to end her conservatorship, she can file a petition to end it.”Louis Keene and Samantha Stark contributed reporting. More

  • in

    Britney Spears’s Father Says He Hopes She Won’t Need a Conservatorship

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Britney Spears’s Legal BattleControl of Spears’s Estate‘We’re Sorry, Britney’Justin Timberlake ApologizesWatch ‘Framing Britney Spears’ in the U.S.AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyBritney Spears’s Father Says He Hopes She Won’t Need a ConservatorshipThe father’s lawyer shared his opinions on the conservatorship on CNN and NBC News recently, almost a month after a documentary examining the arrangement was released.Jamie Spears, left, Britney Spears’s father, has been one of her conservators for more than a decade. He’s telling his side of the story, through a lawyer, on television.Credit…Associated PressMarch 3, 2021Updated 2:48 p.m. ETAs the legal battle and public fallout over Britney Spears’s finances and personal life continue, a lawyer for her father, Jamie Spears, has told CNN that Jamie “would love nothing more than to see Britney not need a conservatorship.”The comments came not long after “Framing Britney Spears,” a TV documentary by The New York Times, released last month, revisited the details of the conservatorship that has shaped this pop singer’s life. Since it aired, Jamie Spears’s lawyer has sought to tell her client’s side of the story on national television programs, including “Good Morning America” last week and NBC News this week.The #FreeBritney campaign, which was also explored in the documentary, has for years campaigned to portray the conservatorship arrangement as an unjust means to control Spears’s life and finances.On Tuesday night, Vivian Lee Thoreen, Jamie Spears’s lawyer, defended the singer’s conservatorship to NBC News.“Britney being safe and not being taken advantage of is his No. 1 priority,” Thoreen said about Jamie Spears as Britney Spears’s co-conservator.Spears has been in a conservatorship, or guardianship, since 2008, after a series of public meltdowns captured by paparazzi. The complicated arrangement designates a representative to manage someone’s personal affairs and their estate if they are unable to care for themselves or if they are vulnerable to outside manipulation.Thoreen told CNN that Jamie Spears “would love nothing more than to see Britney not need a conservatorship.”“Whether or not there is an end to the conservatorship really depends on Britney,” Thoreen added. “If she wants to end her conservatorship, she can file a petition to end it.”Thoreen, who once represented Jamie Spears before the documentary, has rejoined his legal team. She did not return calls seeking comment on Tuesday.In the documentary, though, she told The Times: “Of the cases I’ve been involved in, I have not seen a conservatee who has successfully terminated a conservatorship.”Jamie Spears has been one of his daughter’s conservators for more than a decade, controlling crucial aspects of her life such as her finances and her mental health care. In 2019, citing health problems, he walked back his role, and a professional conservator filled in temporarily.Britney Spears’s court-appointed lawyer, Samuel D. Ingham III, made clear for the first time in a court filing in August that the singer “strongly opposed” having her father as the conservator. Spears had rarely commented on her conservatorship. Ingham, who declined to comment on Tuesday, said at that hearing that Britney Spears believed that the conservatorship “must be changed substantially in order to reflect the major changes in her current lifestyle and her stated wishes.”Then, at a hearing in November, Ingham said that Britney Spears would not perform again as long as her father was in charge of her career. “My client has informed me that she is afraid of her father,” he told the judge.The judge, Brenda Penny, fulfilled a request by Britney Spears that Bessemer Trust, a corporate fiduciary, be added as a co-conservator. But Judge Penny did not remove Jamie Spears as a conservator of Spears’s estate. Britney Spears and her father were back in court on Feb. 11, but the judge did not order any substantive changes.In the week after the release of The Times’s documentary, some media outlets responded with apologies for their past coverage of Spears’s mental health, mothering skills and sexuality. Spears’s former boyfriend Justin Timberlake also apologized to her after the documentary re-examined their breakup.Joe Coscarelli and Julia Jacobs contributed reporting.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    From Britney Spears to Janet Jackson, the Era of the Celebrity Reappraisal

    Credit…Illustration by The New York Times; Texture Fabrik (torn paper)Skip to contentSkip to site indexSpeaking of Britney … What About All Those Other Women?Monica Lewinsky. Janet Jackson. Lindsay Lohan. Whitney Houston. We are living in an era of reappraisals.Credit…Illustration by The New York Times; Texture Fabrik (torn paper)Supported byContinue reading the main storyMs. Bennett is an editor at large covering gender and culture. She was previously gender editor.Feb. 27, 2021Updated 10:07 a.m. ETIn 2007, Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton were apparently fueling enough of a debate among parents about children and “values” for Newsweek to publish a cover story titled “The Girls Gone Wild Effect.”The article described the ubiquitous images and stories about these women — their partying, their rehab stints, what they were or weren’t wearing — and how they could be affecting young fans.I was a junior reporter at Newsweek at the time, just a couple years out of college, around the same age as those so-called train wrecks. I wasn’t quite sure what bothered me so much about the article, but I knew I didn’t like it.Perhaps it was that the editors of the magazine at that time rarely seemed to put women on the cover, so the fact that it was these women said something. The article claimed, according to a poll, that 77 percent of Americans believed these women had “too much influence on young girls” — but weren’t these just young women? And then there was the male lens of it all, from the entertainment executives who molded them to the paparazzi who photographed them to the editors who put them on magazine covers.More than a decade later, we are once again talking about those women — this time through a modern lens. After years of fans fighting to #FreeBritney from the conservatorship over which her father presides — and now with a popular new documentary on the subject — the rise and fall (and rise again?) of Britney Spears is being viewed with fresh eyes.At the same time, a litany of other female celebrities of the ’90s and aughts are being — or perhaps ought to be — re-examined: Ms. Lohan, now out of the spotlight and living in Dubai, where for the first time in her life, she has said, she feels safe; Ms. Hilton, who in a 2020 documentary detailed emotional and physical abuse she suffered as a teenager; Janet Jackson, who was blacklisted after the 2004 Super Bowl “wardrobe malfunction” that left her breast exposed, while the man who exposed it, Justin Timberlake, went on to further fame (and was even invited back to perform at the halftime show in 2018). Brandy, the singer and “Moesha” star, has described faking her marriage for fear that being an unwed mother would threaten her career. Anna Nicole Smith, the troubled actress and model, was labeled “white trash” while she was alive and “obtrusively voluptuous” in her obituary when she was dead. And then there’s Whitney Houston, whose marital problems and battle with drug addiction were broadcast to the world in an early-2000s Bravo series.“I lived through Britney on television, and when she shaved her head, I remember thinking at the time, ‘Why is everybody acting like she’s OK? Like, how is this funny to people? How is this presented as entertainment?’” said Danyel Smith, the former editor in chief of Vibe magazine and the host of the podcast “Black Girl Songbook.”“I felt the same about Whitney,” she said. “It was astonishing to watch the amount of glee being taken in watching her fall apart.”Such reappraisals have become common over the past several years. In the midst of #MeToo and a reckoning over racial injustice, people have begun to re-examine the art, music, monuments and characters on whom cultural significance has been placed. But this current wave revolves not around individuals so much as the machine that produced them: the journalists, the photographers, and the fans — who were reading, watching, buying.“To me, the question is, what do we do when a whole culture essentially becomes the subjugator?” Monica Lewinsky said in a recent interview. “How do we unpack that, how do we move on?”‘It Was a Different Time’In his book, “The Naughty Nineties,” David Friend, an editor at Vanity Fair, described how the market for humiliation thrived in the early ’90s, a trend that can be traced, in part, to the rise of tabloid talk shows such as “The Jerry Springer Show.”Gossip magazines ruled during this time, which meant that the paparazzi did, too. They photographed under skirts, chased cars down winding roads, competing, often dozens at a time, for images that could fetch millions. But the race for the most salacious shot was never an equal-opportunity game. It was not young men who appeared in photos with their bra straps showing and their makeup smeared, or had their breasts enlarged in postproduction without their knowledge, as was the case for Ms. Spears on a 2000 cover of British GQ, according to the photographer, who recently posted about it on Instagram. While white women were scrutinized on the covers of magazines, Black artists were told, as Beyoncé was, that they’d never get covers at all — “because Black people did not sell.”“Magazines in that era were driven by damsel-in-distress narratives,” said Ramin Setoodeh, the executive editor at Variety and the author of “Ladies Who Punch.” “It was almost like a sport to watch a woman self-destruct.” This was the time before stars could talk to their fans directly, of course. There was no clapping back on Twitter, no hosting an Instagram Live to tell one’s side of the story.In a 2013 interview with David Letterman that has recently resurfaced, Ms. Lohan was grilled to the point of tears about a looming trip to rehab, for laughs. (“She’s probably deeply troubled and therefore great in bed,” Donald Trump told Howard Stern in 2004, when the actress was 18.) When Ms. Hilton’s sex tape was leaked without her consent, nobody was using the phrase “revenge porn” or talking openly about emotional pain as trauma. Terms like “accountability,” “consent,” “fat-shaming,” “mental health” — these weren’t part of the pop lexicon, said Susan Douglas, a professor of communication and media at the University of Michigan and a co-author of “Celebrity: A History of Fame.”For the celebrity press, at least, such framing would have served no useful purpose. Disaster and personal tragedy sold.As Harvey Levin, the founder of TMZ, put it in 2006: “Britney is gold. She is crack to our readers. Her life is a complete train wreck, and I thank God for her every day.”“It was a different time,” Rosie O’Donnell, who interviewed Ms. Spears on her talk show in 1999, said in a phone interview. “You’re a level-headed girl,” she told her back then, “and I hope you stay that way.”‘We’re All Collateral Damage’In recent years, there have been Hollywood reappraisals of Anita Hill, a law professor who now leads the Hollywood Commission on sexual harassment, decades after her own high-profile case was dismissed; Tonya Harding, the former Olympic figure skater whose rivalry with Nancy Kerrigan, and its violent climax, were cast against a story of childhood abuse; and Lorena Bobbitt, whose physical harm of her husband has been reframed in the context of years of domestic abuse.Some women have retold their stories themselves. Jessica Simpson published a memoir in 2020 about her time in the spotlight, including her battle with alcoholism. Christina Aguilera described the feeling of being pitted against Ms. Spears — “Britney as the good girl and me as the bad” — in a 2018 story in Cosmopolitan.But Ms. Lewinsky was perhaps the first of this era of women to reclaim her story.After being excoriated in the press for her affair with President Clinton as a 21-year-old intern, she went on to earn a master’s in social psychology. She carefully re-emerged in the public eye in 2014, with an essay and TED Talk about public shame. Now she’s producing a documentary on the subject, and how it permeates society.“We tend to forget the collective experience,” Ms. Lewinsky said by phone. “We direct this kind of vitriol and misogyny toward one woman, but it actually reverberates to all women. We’re all collateral damage, whether we’re the object or not.”These days, that view is more widely held. Abuse and discrimination are now generally seen as systemic issues, and those who endure it are lent more credibility and sympathy. Contemporary artists speak candidly about mental health; their seeking help tends to be applauded rather than ridiculed. And social media has enabled stars to take back some control (while also opening them up to further scrutiny in other ways).“The legacy media star has dimmed,” said Allison Yarrow, the author of “90s Bitch: Media, Culture, and the Failed Promise of Gender Equality. Lizzo, for instance, posts photos on Instagram that align with the body positivity her fans admire. Billie Eilish speaks frequently and frankly about mental health. FKA Twigs, when asked about her allegations of abuse against her ex, Shia LaBeouf, and why she didn’t leave, can choose not to answer: “The question should really be to the abuser, ‘Why are you holding someone hostage with abuse?’”Now, entertainment journalists who worked through the tabloid era are looking back on their coverage through a critical lens; some are expressing regret and even issuing apologies.Steven Daly, who wrote the infamous 1999 Rolling Stone cover story on Britney Spears, said that in hindsight, having a 17-year-old girl show him, a man in his 30s, around her childhood bedroom was slightly creepy.But he is more troubled by the photos that appeared alongside his piece: Britney in a bra and hot pants holding a Teletubby; Britney in a pair of white cotton underwear surrounded by her bedroom dolls; photos the pop star — rather than the photographer or editors — was often asked to defend.“These were soft-porn pictures of an underage girl,” said Mr. Daly, now 60. “If you did that nowadays, you’d be put through a wood chipper.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    On ‘S.N.L.’, Fictional Britney Spears Seeks Apologies From Cruz, Cuomo and Carano

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyOn ‘S.N.L.’, Fictional Britney Spears Seeks Apologies From Cruz, Cuomo and Carano“Saturday Night Live” gave several famous people the chance to say sorry on an episode hosted by Regé-Jean Page of “Bridgerton.”In the opening sketch of “S.N.L.,” Pete Davidson and Aidy Bryant played Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, each of whom had some explaining to do after the week’s events.Credit…NBC Universal, via YouTubeFeb. 21, 2021It has been a memorable week or so for public figures committing misdeeds, and “Saturday Night Live” gave a few of them a forum to apologize on a fictional talk show called “Oops, You Did It Again,” hosted by the relatively blameless Britney Spears.This week’s broadcast, hosted by the “Bridgerton” star Regé-Jean Page and featuring the musical guest Bad Bunny, began as the cast member Chloe Fineman, playing Spears, reminded viewers that they knew her “from my upbeat Instagram videos and the word ‘conservatorship.’”She added that she now had a show in which “people could come on and apologize for things they’ve done wrong, because after the ‘Free Britney’ documentary came out, I’m receiving hundreds of apologies a day.”[embedded content]Her first guest was Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, played by Aidy Bryant in braided hair, bluejeans and a Cancún family vacation T-shirt. Holding up a frothy beverage, Bryant unconvincingly explained that she wasn’t actually tan — “I just cried myself red over my fellow Texans, and that’s why I drink in their honor,” she said.Bryant added that she was “in a little bit of hot water, which I’m told is a thing no one in Texas has.” If her apology was falling short, she said, “I’m sorry, I’m pretty bad at human stuff.”The show’s next guest was Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York, played by Pete Davidson. Davidson first asked the audience if it had welcomed him “because indoor dining is back in New York,” then sheepishly acknowledged: “All right, I know. It’s because of the nursing home stuff.”Asked to elaborate, Davidson added: “Some of the people who died in the nursing homes were not counted as nursing home deaths, they were counted as hospital deaths. Which is basically what happens at Disney World, OK? People die and they move the bodies. They say, ‘Oh, I guess Brenda died in the parking lot, not on the teacups.’”Told that Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York thought he should be investigated, Davidson lashed out: “I will bury him in the tallest grave this city has ever seen,” he said.The third and final guest was Gina Carano, the former “Mandalorian” star who was fired by Disney, played in the sketch by Cecily Strong.Though Strong denied that she had done anything wrong, Fineman reminded her that she had shared an Instagram post that compared American politics to Nazi Germany.“I never would have made that Nazi comparison if I’d known everybody was going to be such a Nazi about it,” Strong said.When Bryant’s Cruz tried to sympathize with her, Strong brushed her off: “I am strong and you are a pile of soup,” she said.Cultural barometer of the week“S.N.L.” was generous this week when it came to acknowledging actors who are new to the pop-cultural firmament, including its host, Page (whose period romance “Bridgerton” was satirized in this somewhat bawdy sketch that aired late in the night). Earlier in the evening, in a sendup of actors’ round tables hosted by Ego Nwodim, Page appeared as the actor Kingsley Ben-Adir, who plays Malcolm X in “One Night in Miami.” Chris Redd played the “Judas and the Black Messiah” star Daniel Kaluuya.The recreations of those actors and their award-grabbing movies were pretty spotless. The jokes, however, were mostly about having Nwodim’s character fawn over the actors’ British accents (and about Kenan Thompson as Ice Cube, whose efforts to pass himself off as British didn’t go quite so smoothly).Music video of the weekNwodim returned for some well-deserved screen time in this slickly produced music video, playing a nightclub patron whose fantasy that she is hitting it off with a handsome fellow reveler (Page) gives way to the reality that she has, in fact, spent the last year living under lockdown in her apartment and gradually lost her mind. (Hence the song title, “Loco.”)As Nwodim raps in the video: “I’m loco, as in my brain done broke-o / But hey, you either laugh or you cry like ‘Coco.’” Her few acquaintances include Davidson (who has gone so crazy in his own quarantine that he understands the movie “Tenet”) and Bad Bunny (as a singing houseplant).Weekend Update jokes of the weekOver at the Weekend Update desk, the anchors Colin Jost and Michael Che continued to riff on Cruz’s canceled Cancún vacation and the winter weather crisis in Texas.Jost began:Well, if you hate Ted Cruz, this was a pretty fun week. And if you like Ted Cruz, then you’re Ted Cruz. Senator Cruz, whose face is slowly being reclaimed by nature, said that his decision to go on a family vacation to Cancun during Texas’s weather emergency was obviously a mistake. As was the tattoo he got there. [At that moment, a satirical photo appeared behind Jost of a lower-back tattoo of a leaping dolphin.]Jost continued:Cruz initially released a statement saying he only went on vacation because his daughters made him go. And if you think it was bad to throw his daughters under the bus, Cruz would like you to know that that statement was his wife’s idea. I just love that after he abandoned Texas, he came back in a Texas flag mask like nothing happened. That’s like Jared and Ivanka walking down Fifth Avenue in “I Love New York” shirts.Che picked up on the riff, adding:Cruz would have returned from Mexico even sooner but it took him, like, 40 minutes to get out of a hammock. This week’s massive winter storm caused millions of Texans to lose power. It was the most snow seen in Texas since Michael Irvin’s Super Bowl party. Many Texans are without heat and clean water after pipes froze in the extreme cold. “Boy, this kind of thing would never happen in New York,” said people who have never lived in the projects.Weekend Update deskside bit of the weekDavidson returned to the Weekend Update desk for the latest in his series of personal monologues, this one about the impact of having spent Valentine’s Day in lockdown. As Davidson explained, it was “the first time being alone wasn’t my fault.” And, he said, after watching the “Saving Britney” documentary with his mother, he had to move out of the house that they share in Staten Island.With mock chagrin, Davidson said: “My mom has way more of a case to take over my finances than Britney’s dad ever did. I was like: ‘Wait, she can do that? And she hasn’t? Doesn’t she love me?’ All Britney did was shave her head. I got a life size tattoo of the Tootsie Pop owl.”Davidson added: “My mom is a lot like this show. No matter what I do, I’m never asked to leave. Also, they’re both really old and noticeably fatigued.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    5 Questions About Britney Spears, Answered

    5 Questions About Britney Spears, AnsweredMario Anzuoni/ReutersFollowing the release of the documentary “Framing Britney Spears,” there’s been renewed attention on the pop star’s battle with her father, Jamie Spears, over control of her personal well-being and finances.I’ve been following the case closely. Here’s what you should know → More