Official Statement by Britney Spears’ Publicist: "VMA Objectives, in Large Measure, Have Been Met"
Here is the official statement by Britney’s publicist on the VMAs, attained exclusively by Media Orchard:
Mr. Perez Hilton, ranking bloggers, members of the tabloid media, thank you for the opportunity to provide my assessment of the situation at the VMAs, and to discuss the recommendations I recently provided to my client, her entourage and her accidental children for the way forward.
The entertainment objectives of the VMA performance have, in large measure, been met. The illustration at left shows the singing and dancing challenges at the VMAs, which were exascerbated by malign actions by Sarah Silverman and Kanye West. Lack of adequate leg-muscle capacity, lingering baby weight, and easily located quantities of Haagen-Dazs and vodka have added to Britney’s difficulties. To compensate, Britney has successfully employed non-kinetic means for singing and dancing.
I am pleased to report that in the face of the brutal summer heat of Beverly Hills, the overall number of Brit-cidents has declined in eight of the past 12 weeks, with the number of Brit-cidents in the last two weeks at the lowest levels seen since June 2006. The number of overall bouts of Britney-inspired nausea among civilians also declined during this period, although the numbers in each area are still at troubling levels.
One reason for the VMA success and decline in Brit-cidents is that, with the help of armor-plated umbrellas, Britney has dealt significant blows to al Paparazzi across Hollywood. Though al Paparazzi and its affiliates, including West and Silverman, remain dangerous, Britney has taken away a number of their sanctuaries and gained the initiative in many areas.
Britney’s singing and dancing capacity has continued to improve, albeit slowly and amid continuing concerns about substance abuse and generally high levels of craziness. Based on this, and on the further progress we believe we can achieve over the next few months, I believe that we will be able to reduce craziness to the pre-Federline level by next summer.
Beyond that, while noting that Britney remains complex, difficult and downright frustrating, I also believe that it is possible to achieve Britney’s objective for a career comeback over time, although doing so will be neither quick nor easy. There will likely be additional setbacks and tough losses of underwear along the way.
We do not, however, just rely on gut feel, however substantial that gut may be. We endeavor to ensure our analysis of the tabloids is conducted with rigor and consistency, as our ability to achieve a nuanced understanding of the Britney environment is dependent on collecting and analyzing data in a consistent way over time.
The number of suicides resulting directly from Britney’s VMA performance has been exaggerated.
Al Paparazzi is certainly not defeated. However — like Britney — it is off balance, and Britney’s comeback is on track thanks to her successful VMA initiative.
Thank you.
[Britney-Osama image from Unconfirmed Sources]
A Literary Analysis of "Remembrance of Who I Am," by Britney Spears
Famed academic Dr. O.R. Chard has kindly agreed to analyze the following poem:
Remembrance of Who I Am, by Britney Spears
No more chains
That you gave me.
Enough of pain
Now I’m craving
Something sweet, so delight
How do you stand sleeping at night?
(Dr. Chard: Criticism so far published has concentrated upon two areas in interpreting this poem. First, the conclusion that the poem is an experience shown from the point of view of a new mother who is frustrated with her choice of provider. Second, that the spacing and odd syntax are suggestive of Spears’ harried life in the media spotlight. The effect here is to communicate hustle, bustle, and speed, but also the child-like noise of children playing, perhaps imitating a whistle.)
Silly patterns that we follow
You pull me in
I’m being swallowed.
By the ones you think you love
They pull you down
You can’t see up above.
(Dr. Chard: A scatological semantic field begins to emerge from the poem. The poem contains a breathless quality, and the language is structured like a nursery rhyme. Unfortunately, it reflects a limited linguistic knowledge of children’s songs and chants. The slang reference to “silly patterns,” as I would interpret, means to defecate in one’s pants.)
Manipulation is the key
They screw it in
Because you’re naive.
You come to me now
Why do you bother?
Remember the Bible
The sins of the Father.
What you do
You pass down
No wonder why
I lost my crown.
(Dr. Chard: This passage serves merely to illustrate the propensity of the poem to contain multiple, and equally important, readings within itself. How can one define “evil” without recourse to “good”? The struggle to determine “truth” in this poem remains undecidable since neither one nor the other can assume the supremacy.)
You don’t see me now
You ask yourself why
My crown is back
And it’s way too high
For you to be in my presence
Especially my son
You should bow down
I’ve only just begun.
The guilt you fed me
Made me weak.
The voodoo you did
I couldn’t speak.
(Dr. Chard: Sexual orgies, intoxication, deviant sexual practices, nature, and clear hints of pedophilia abound in every line of this poem.)
You’re awakening
The phone is ringing.
Resurrection of my soul
The fear I’m bringing.
What will you say
And what will you do?
She’s not the same person that you’re used to.
(Dr. Chard: To return to the inside / outside dichotomy: the reader is first pulled inside the poem since the visual elements of the poem fail to convey direct, unimpeded access to the thing itself. The reader goes inside the poem — the verbal / semantic — to find meaning. However, because of the decomposition of the words in the poem, the multiple puns, allusions, and meanings, the reader is forced into other systems of signification outside the poem. Thus, the reader looks outward toward fields of French and numerical representation. This oscillation between inside / outside is one of the many undecided issues within the poem.)
You trick me one, twice, now it’s three.
Look who’s smiling now
Damn, it’s good to be me!
*This is for everyone who thinks they know me…
(Dr. Chard: You got me. I have no idea what the hell this chick is talking about. The last line, in particular, is likely to remain a mysterious mystery for those who would attempt to interpret its mysterious mysteriousness.)
Thank you, Dr. Chard.
(And thanks to Iain Landles as well.)
Technorati tags: Britney
In Praise of Britney Spears
This is just too much. Leave the poor woman alone; heck, she already has to deal with this.
Lost in all the coverage of how unfit Britney is as a mother: She’s a star who actually acts like a mom. Not perfect. Doing the best she can — but doing it herself. How many stars hand off the baby to a nanny at birth and just show up to visit now and again after that?
That’s OK — Brit will have the last laugh. People are drawn to stars with flaws. If a mom who snorts coke in public can be forgiven, so can Britney.
Technorati tags: Britney Spears
US Weekly: Fair and Balanced Britney Coverage
In reading the celebrity rags after Cathy tosses them on the nightstand, we’ve come upon a media battle as politically charged as the daily dust-up between Fox News Channel and CNN.
Only in this case, it’s not about right vs. left, Republican vs. Democrat, anti-abortion vs. pro-choice.
It’s about anti-Britney vs. pro-Britney.
US Weekly is in the role of Fox News — all mean-spirited anti-Britney-ness, in the same way that FNC is relentlessly anti-Democratic.
People is in the role of its Time Warner cousin CNN — more empathetic to the plight of Britney (the Democrats) and willing to report an occasional positive story.
Just check the June 26 issues of both pubs (the first one after Britney’s interview with Matt Lauer) to see the extent of this political divide:
People
Headline: Britney: “I Know I’m a Good Mom”
Subhead: In a tearful interview with Matt Lauer, Britney Spears defends her marriage and parenting skills and blames the paparazzi for making her an “emotional wreck.”
Description of Britney’s pre-interview stroll with husband and baby: “Kevin would talk to Sean and then break out into a song, making up the lyrics as he went along,” says a witness. “It made Britney laugh.” At one point, Spears leaned in and kissed her husband on the mouth, with Sean snuggled in between them like a big baby sandwich.
Choice excerpt: When Lauer pointed out a magazine photo caption that said, “Oops, No. 3,” Spears responded, “There will be an ‘Oops, No. 100.’ There’ll be plenty more oopses. I’m not perfect — I’m human.”
US Weekly
Headline: “I’m an Emotional Wreck”
Subhead: In a new Dateline NBC interview, a stressed Britney Spears defends her husband. But is she being totally truthful?
Description of Britney’s pre-interview stroll with husband and baby: The moment seemed a little too picture-perfect. Was it a casual outing or calculated image control?
Choice excerpt: Cry her a river! In 2003, Spears sobbed “strong, Britney,” when Diane Sawyer inquired about her “rough year” and split with Justin Timberlake. On Dateline, she gets misty about her critics. “You have to realize that we’re people.”
But US Weekly was only warming up for its full-scale assault on Britney’s Lauer interview in the July 3 edition, which is just hitting the stands.
This one includes the following features:
1. An US poll (of 100 people) in which 60 percent of respondents say that Britney was not telling the truth in the Lauer interview.
2. A second US poll (of 100 people) in which 87 percent of respondents say they “respect Britney less” after the interview.
3. A two-page story in which “body-language experts” and others break down the interview and conclude, on balance, that she’s lying.
Hmmm. Two straight weeks of bashing Britney’s legitimate complaints about unfair coverage and paparazzi harassment from publications like US Weekly? Wethinks US protests too much.
US Weekly‘s anti-Britney campaign is nothing new. It’s relentless — every week — with nary a nice word said about the woman. Obviously there is an audience for this, just as there is an audience for the hate-filled stylings of Hannity, O’Reilly, et al.
If we spewed that kind of negativity every day, we’d be filled with self-loathing. Oh, well — to each his own, we guess.
Technorati tags: PR, Public Relations, Britney