A clip of Letterman interviewing Lindsey Lohan has made the rounds online
tonight. It’s not being received well

https://twitter.com/treytylor/status/1360661970924556291?s=21


On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 7:22 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yeah but...at the NYT, isn’t it customary that if they are unable to do
> their own reporting, or share the reliable reporting of other credible
> journalists, that they don’t run the story?
>
> I would say the documentary was basically about the podcast and social
> media fan sites, with a tacked on reminder of who Spears is for those who
> forgot. There is a story here, but the NYT never got into it. At least,
> instead of repeating the fans vague assertion that people as young and
> active as Spears are rarely put on probate Conservatorship (which, I
> believe is true), why not give us some basic numbers? How many people are
> placed on PC each year in this country, how many of those are under 60 and
> not obviously demented or gravely impaired? Of those younger adults not
> obviously gravely impaired, what do we know about them? Are they usually
> wealthy? Are their concerns about minor children?  Of the (again, I believe
> the fans are correct) relatively few who have gotten off of PC, how did
> that happen? Why not find a few as similarly situated to Spears as possible
> and interview them?
>
> There are questions about mismanagement of her estate; she had this huge
> Vegas deal taking in millions per year (! How many people on PC are
> currently earning tens of millions of dollars per year?) and yet her total
> estate is valued at “only” $50 something million, which seems like less
> than what she was worth before the Vegas deal. A Conservator is only
> supposed to be able to make major decisions about assets with court
> approval, and most of these financial records are supposed to be public.
> Why didn’t the documentary report on this?
>
> On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 at 4:20 PM Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I am going to guess this is a stab at being more relevant by the NYT and
>> it's dealing with tighter deadlines and not getting the resources that go
>> to the print product. It's not simply clickbait because there is a real
>> story here. The choice of Britney as a subject and the time spent talking
>> about and to her most fervent fans leads me to think that it was done that
>> way to get attention from fans. The fact is the core of the story is a
>> court fight involving Britney and her father and the NYT crew couldn't get
>> any comment from Britney (or her lawyers), her father (or his lawyers), or
>> the court and they pressed ahead and aired this as a story.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:10 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay, I watched the “Framing Britney Spears” “documentary” on Hulu.
>>> Yikes.
>>>
>>> 1. How did the NYT let its name be attached to this? It looks and smells
>>> more like TMZ. It is little more than a summary of what has been said and
>>> reported by people on social media, with little or no actual independent
>>> reporting from the NYT.
>>>
>>> 2. One of the most basic things missing is an explanation of what it
>>> means to be on conservatorship in CA (there are several different kinds)
>>> and what a judge had to have found to be true to put her on one. I am most
>>> familiar with LPS Conservators, who do have the power to commit people to
>>> psychiatric hospitalization. It appears that Spears has a Probate (not LPS)
>>> Conservatorship, for both Person and Estate. These conservators (even for
>>> Person) can not hospitalize the conservatee against their will. So, if
>>> Spears was hospitalized against her will, it would have had to have been
>>> because doctors found her to be a danger to herself or others, or (much
>>> less likely) gravely disabled. We know she was hospitalized on a 5150 back
>>> in the 2008 period, but I don’t think we know what the status was of the
>>> most recent hospitalization. Her father could have coerced her into
>>> accepting hospitalization, since he controls her finances and many aspects
>>> of her person, but again we don’t know (and again, the NYT offers no
>>> original reporting about this).
>>>
>>> 3. There is always the possibility of gross corruption (the father pays
>>> off the judges and others to rule in his favor), but to assume this without
>>> evidence is the definition of a conspiracy theory. More likely is that,
>>> whatever else is going on, Spears suffers from a serious psychiatric
>>> disorder. I am surprised that for all the histrionic “Leave Brittany
>>> Alone!” Type Fan groups cited in the Doc, there seemed to be little
>>> recognition of or care about this basic fact by people who claim to love
>>> her. The court has to be primarily concerned with the mental health and
>>> well-being of Spears, and the fact she is still conserved suggests that the
>>> court has evidence that she continues to have significant problems.
>>> Whatever else is going on, she likely continues to be a very disordered and
>>> unhappy person.
>>>
>>> 4. While I am not as familiar with probate Conservatorship, what I do
>>> know leaves me surprised and somewhat suspicious that it is being used in
>>> Spears case, at least for Person. What the documentary does not tell us is
>>> why the court settled on Conservatorship, when, as I understand it, to do
>>> so they have to first consider and reject several other less restrictive
>>> arrangements. I have never treated anyone as wealthy as Spears, but it does
>>> smell like this entire scheme was designed with the well-being of her
>>> estate (and perhaps the financial interests of record and other
>>> corporations) in mind, rather than of Spears herself.
>>>
>>> 5. My guess is that at the heart of all this is the judgement that
>>> Spears was found to be pathologically vulnerable to influence by suspicious
>>> people, like Sam Lutfi. This is alluded to in the documentary, but with
>>> very little actual reporting. As suspicious as I am of her father, by
>>> relying on tabloid and social media memes the documentary is probably
>>> unfair to him. More likely the courts have repeatedly found that without
>>> the Conservatorship, Spears would fall under the control of Lutfi and
>>> people like him who would be more harmful to her than her father. If
>>> something like this is true, I can see why the courts would be reluctant to
>>> eliminate the Conservatorship, or even to name someone as Conservator of
>>> Spears own choosing. It is actually possible that the current arrangement
>>> gives Spears as much freedom as is consistent with her own well-being, and
>>> that of her children, by limiting the ability of unsavory influencers to
>>> manipulate her to drain her resources and harm others.
>>>
>>> The reason we know so little about this is that most of it is not
>>> properly our business. The Courts are there to review the case and protect
>>> her interests, not Instagrammers. Still, with so much money at stake, it
>>> may be appropriate for the press to ensure that the courts are acting
>>> properly. I just wish the press in this case was doing a better job.
>>>
>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 2:48 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok, sounds like maybe I will check out the doc. My take on her around
>>>> that time was that she needed a conservator, but it should not have been
>>>> her father, or anyone who stood to profit from commodifying her.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 1:00 PM Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:58 AM Kevin M. <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, yesterday Diane Sawyer trended because people suddenly decided
>>>>>> her interview of Spears from nearly two decades ago was bad, which is a 
>>>>>> bit
>>>>>> like people only just now realizing Geraldo is really bad at his job.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I miss Ferguson on late night. I understand why he got out when he
>>>>>> did, but I still wish he’d have stayed through Trump.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I wanted to watch the Britney doc on Hulu before responding so I could
>>>>> avoid hot takes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have taken to watching documentaries about bands from when I grew
>>>>> up, usually on YouTube. There are two types: movie length promotions made
>>>>> for fans where the band is awesome, all their music is awesome, and 
>>>>> they'll
>>>>> be beloved until the end of time. And then there are more reflective
>>>>> documentaries, made a couple of decades after the band broke up, where the
>>>>> musicians, managers, record company executives, etc talk about the rise of
>>>>> the band, what life was like at the top, and why it fell apart. Those are
>>>>> the documentaries I watch. I'll even watch if it's about a band or an
>>>>> artist who was very popular but I didn't follow at the time. I figure I 
>>>>> can
>>>>> put my biases aside and see if I missed out on any good music.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Britney documentary was not about her music. The frame is a legal
>>>>> battle over conservatorship, a status she entered into in 2008. The first
>>>>> half of the doc is about her life up to 2008 and the second half is about
>>>>> the conservatorship, the legal situation, and a movement from her fans to
>>>>> end the conservatorship. The first half is tough to watch even though it
>>>>> happened in recent enough memory. The tabloids saw dollar signs in 
>>>>> covering
>>>>> her and they had no conscience about any damage they might be doing to her
>>>>> and certainly no restraint. And the attitude infiltrated into mainstream
>>>>> celebrity coverage like the Diane Sawyer interview. It would be at least 
>>>>> as
>>>>> much of a relief for me to know that she gives up music altogether and 
>>>>> goes
>>>>> to live a quiet life somewhere raising her kids (and there's no sign of
>>>>> that happening) as hearing she is recording a new album.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for Craig Ferguson he brought his own vulnerability into his
>>>>> monologues and the show and it was really refreshing to see him so 
>>>>> fearless
>>>>> talking about his past. He had an empathy for his guests and I miss that,
>>>>> too. In the late stages of his show he burned out and stopped putting any
>>>>> effort into it. I really liked the show during his peak, but I'm glad he
>>>>> got out of it in time.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJE-FiFFEGuM9THGVeGuW7-6Li0qjfWiJubzxUhz0MX_xDzvfQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJE-FiFFEGuM9THGVeGuW7-6Li0qjfWiJubzxUhz0MX_xDzvfQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKWQS5RqwJu11xEDG61kuQkv469ahj8xJhK00EWT6wvkA%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKWQS5RqwJu11xEDG61kuQkv469ahj8xJhK00EWT6wvkA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "TVorNotTV" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJE-FiHc-gX2mxUVebUufzZwmqnQouGeRwobBeFmVA54Y7t5Pw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJE-FiHc-gX2mxUVebUufzZwmqnQouGeRwobBeFmVA54Y7t5Pw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BOp1CLPqN0QyA1QLNJDmLVUm2YNThN%3DQSCcSU5uhFXLA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BOp1CLPqN0QyA1QLNJDmLVUm2YNThN%3DQSCcSU5uhFXLA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
-- 
Kevin M. (RPCV)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4AYOOO_SCscmc8nMni1KLz8_0SLkH4j9491OYFWzM1PBQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to