It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Brit's a Brit? When did that happen?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 11:09 PM
Hmm. First saw this on Slate V, but now can't find it again. So this will have to do...

It's absolutely fascinating. In a single video you get Britney trying to leave the trailer park via Knightsbridge, you get to see how absolutely banal the papparazzi and their lives really are (thank you for showing us that in stark detail. No, really, thankyou!) but you also get to hear Delroy Lindo claim to be homeless and repeat the same six words over and over again like the needle is stuck in the same groove.

Come on, tell me that isn't Delroy Lindo's voice!

And how many time has Britney watched Domino?

Keira Knightly, beware. Be very, very ware!

posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 11:27 PM
all i can say is im shocked,

no wonder that poor girl is going nuts!

she should come over here... (uk)

'cause no one would really give a monkey's and she might be able to

get on with her life.

imagine getting that kind of harassment yourself 24/7.


posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 12:36 PM
reply to post by callmedave

REALLY???? You guys want her?????? Promise???? If you take her......NO GIVE BACKS......We dont want her anymore.... Her and Amy Winehouse would make fine matching wrecks for you guys.....

posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 09:44 PM
reply to post by callmedave

It's only kinda ironic (as long as you don't mind using the "i" word incorrectly) that you would say she'd get more peace in the UK.

After all, Fleet Street invented the papparazi, initially with the sole purpose of harrassing the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha's.

Even in the bad old days of Hard Copy and the Stalkerazi the Brits were regarded as the planet's exponents of the worst kind of intrusion (remember the shots of HRH Charlie-boy coming out of the shower? Shot through the window, with a zoom lens, by a Brit.), it wasn't until that unfortunate incident in Paris in '97 that the reputation went "abroad".

But, it seems that it's only in the last four years that the US has really become the centre of vacuous papparazi "reporting" and it appears to have coincided with the "rise" (for desparate want of a better word) of a certain hotel "heiress" and the pigment-challenged daughter of a Commodore. Even "E"-network didn't seem as so totally omnipresent prior to these two.

It's probably no co-incidence that said "heiress" has been at the centre of a spider's web of personal and career meltdowns that have all played out on camera, in print and on the web and only ever-so-slightly publicly humiliatingly.

She was at Sundance. Why? Was she starring in a movie? Did she produce, direct or write a movie being exhibited? Is she dating someone in any of those four categories? If the answer to all of these questions is "no", then WTF was she doing there and, more importantly, why did the media give her airtime, taking it away from people whose answers to those questions were "yes"?

See, it's not the fake Britiswh accent that got my attention, nor was it the ad-nauseum repitition of "Britney, help a homeless guy out", although, God knows, that was mightily distracting, it was the sheer meaningless banality of the running commentary from the "reporters" themselves. Finally, we can see how meaningless their work is, from their own mouths.

Just go back and listen to that crap about the "party" and "do you like the Brazilians?"

I ask you: "Who f@%kin' CARES?"

You know, there are some people who are actually trying to cure cancer. Why, then, are we focussing on the major personal missteps of a young woman when we should be questioning the parenting skills of the mother who raised her?

(I'm not a puritan, I just like to see responsibility properly assigned.)

I work in news media, but when I look at what our American cousins choose to put on air...

When there is so much else going on in the world and they choose to pay people for this crap, all I want to do is

Okay, not all of that rant was aimed at you, Dave, but thanks for the opportunity.

posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:39 PM
reply to post by HowlrunnerIV

an excellent post, and unfortunatly nothing i can disagree with,

yes we invented it, its the kinda thing that depresses me when i see it,


i was more thinking we see "stars" ..?? celebrities all the time where i live,

shopping etc being normal.

and thre're just ignored (barring amy, of course)


posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 10:51 PM
Aha, Amy, the UK's resident meltdown (apparrently literally). So, there I was watching Channel V on a colleague's screen (his office, not mine) and what should pop up but Amy singing (I couldn't believe it, absolutely staggered me!) how they wanted her to go to rehab but she wasn't going to go. And the song was nominated.

For what?

"Best personal foresight put to music"?

"Most unintentionally tragicomic personal statement"?

"Best use of irony"?

"Loudest ad for my own impending demise from stupidity"?

posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 11:19 PM
Unfortunately we have entertainers who can't let themselves be judged on the merits of their performances and when they start to fade from the limelight, they act out in some outrageous way to pop back into the forefront. The paparrazi are a good way for "stars" to get some free advertising. And to think I was a big fan of the Mickey Mouse club and the Mouseketeers. That was back in Annette Funicellos day though. lol

posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 09:37 PM
Yeah, I'm not so sure, 'though.

Yes, fading stars suddenly find ways to be, if not relevant then, topical.

But watching Britney self-destruct seems (I emphasise seems) to be a damn good indictment of the current media focus on "celebrity" or "personality" at the clear expense of either "issue" or "news".

Yesterday the scroller said a judge had ordered a psychiatric evaluation of Britney to see if she was actually aware of what was happening around her etc.

The fact that she ditched professional photo-sleaze Adnan, if, indeed, he was ever actually her boyfriend, would suggest she's aware enough to know that some low-life was directly profiting from their relationship (pity she couldn't make that distinction when she decided to bang her married backing dancer). The video at the start of the thread would seem to suggest that he was dumb enough to be tipping his erstwhile colleagues off as to where she (and he) would be so they could get their photos and video for the "story".

I guess Britney (and Paris and co) are the perfect indictment of the modern entertainment industry. Remember when she was telling us all that she was a good Christian girl who wouldn't be having pre-marital sex? Yes, I know it was last century, but last century now is a lot less time ago than last century was a decade ago.

In that decade we've seen Britney apparently grow up (if you call that growing up!), Paris prove that celebrity plus money minus brains is a combination that can defeat even a porno movie (Remember all the Hugh Grant/Divine Brown brouhaha? We didn't even have video of that!) and Lindsay Lohan decide that "Latest ex-Child Star Train Wreck" is a worthy prize.

The difference now is that somehow Lindsay Lohan doing exactly what several hundred others have done is now worthy of headline news. Why, it's neither new nor different, so what makes it so special now? Especially when the US is mired in its biggest geo-political mess since Ngo Dinh Diem was shot in the head.

Why is it that an adult's repeated failure to take responsibility for themselves is somehow worthy of my concern? Grow the # up, I say.

Paris Hilton repeatedly breaks the law. She does a fortnight in prison and when she gets out larry King puts her live in front of the whole world and practically gives her a free ride. Okay, he was letting her words, as stupid as they were, speak for themselves, but that only confirms our intelligence, it doesn't help her understand that the rest of us aren't as stupid as her and she needs to stop assuming that we are.

Paris want to go to Rwanda! Why? How on earth does she think that hervisiting the scene of the world's most-recent-but-one genocidal spree will in any way help anybody but herself? She says she wants to use her clebrity to help others, that time in prison gave her perspective etc etc crap crap crap.

Here's a hint, honey, get off the tv screen. That would be the biggest help you could be to anyone. You contribute exactly zero to the human experience. In fact you are the direct cause of a lessening in the human experience.

Having fun in Sundance were you? I hope so. But how many stories weren't told because you were taking up space in the public eye?

How many other stories are not being told because we are all so concerned/overjoyed/astounded by Britney's problems?

Hey, MSM, don't give me that crap about supply and demand. People are not going to switch from CNN to the E Channel just because you stop showing Britney. But they might switch over to Bloomberg if you don't stop showing her.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:12 AM
I can't believe I actually ventured into this thread and found myself inclined to post here. HowIrunnerIV, you certainly are something. While I agree that the whole entertainment industry is stupid and panders to those with no grasp on reality, I just don't understand how you have such intimate knowledge of every single move/debacle/video of all those celebrities and you can actually write several paragraphs about it. Seems to me it has you enthralled with all this fantasy world crap.

The only thing I know about Britney is she has no career left and she owes more to those 'low life' paparazzi's then they do to her for keeping it on life support for so long.

Anyway, strange site this ATS is...


log in