| |
Discussion: Is Britney the biggest celebrity of the 21st century?
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Anyway, again, Britney is just tabloid fodder. She's never been on TIME's Most Influential People list (Kim has), she hasn't had meetings with multiple world leaders (Kim has), she doesn't get invited to speak at important conferences that people like MLK have spoken at (Kim does).
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/14/2010
Posts: 6,781
|
That is not even a question. I don't even think there's someone else to compare with her in terms of celebrity/media exposure during the last decade.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Eternium
Kim was literally a closet organizer for a celebrity from 2006-2010. Britney has never been less famous than Kim was in those years. Hell, I have 1,000+ Facebook friends. I've never been less famous than Kim was before 2011.
|
That last sentence doesn't even make any sense.
Anyway, she had a company where she helped celebrities resell their designer clothes. Big deal. And that was over way before 2010. You're just saying things to say things at this point.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 9/14/2010
Posts: 78,921
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Eternium
Most searched artist by year:
2001: Britney Spears
2002: Britney Spears
2003: Britney Spears
2004: Paris Hilton
2005: Britney Spears
2006: Britney Spears
2007: Britney Spears
2008: Britney Spears
2009: Michael Jackson
2010: Miley Cyrus
2011: Kim Kardashian
2012: Kim Kardashian
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/22446...ideshow/267790
So Britney's had the biggest career for a female entertainer and the most searched this century so far. How exactly is she not the biggest celebrity? |
This is so false.
When has Britney ever ranked #1 on Forbes, under "Web Rank"? Gaga did, in 2010. Miley Cyrus 
#2 Beyoncé, #3 Britney Spears. Close but not quite.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/6/2015
Posts: 5,608
|
Absolutely. No matter what's happening now, people need to remember that her career choices and personal life were on people's minds daily from 2000-2008. This is not a bragging point, but in 2007 hardly a day went by without some kind of Britney news, no matter how mundane. Even if her artistry isn't in the same league as Madonna, Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley, etc., she has experienced a level of media attention that only the very top echelon of stars can relate to. Her life is a textbook for a course on media phenomena and pop culture.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/2/2014
Posts: 9,438
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Anyway, again, Britney is just tabloid fodder. She's never been on TIME's Most Influential People list (Kim has), she hasn't had meetings with multiple world leaders (Kim has), she doesn't get invited to speak at important conferences that people like MLK have spoken at (Kim does).
|
Britney is the most successful female music act of this century, I mean no one has time to even post the amount of lists she has topped this century.
I'm sorry but the only thing we can argue from Kim on Britney here is their fame. In everything else any other artist that has any kind of talent is superior than Kim Kardashian.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 32,982
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Anyway, again, Britney is just tabloid fodder. She's never been on TIME's Most Influential People list (Kim has), she hasn't had meetings with multiple world leaders (Kim has), she doesn't get invited to speak at important conferences that people like MLK have spoken at (Kim does).
|
This has me screaming. Kim Kardashian is a less talented Paris Hilton clone who couldn't get her music career off the ground and owes her entire career to her momager. She would be completely irrelevant right now if it weren't for Caitlyn and Kylie 
Britney's moved almost 200M records, her perfumes have outgrossed Kim's career, she's had impact on other artists, has been famous for almost two decades, etc.
Kim's got 2-3 years left depending on how long Kylie and Kris can keep her afloat and will go down the way of Paris. She won't be remembered in ten years, let alone in 2099 
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/17/2013
Posts: 3,931
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
No
Kim is. Britney is nothing more than tabloid fodder. |
The irony 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 6,474
|
Yeah, it's kind of undeniable. Britney wins.
Maybe Angelina Jolie?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 9,990
|
Quote:
Originally posted by J a y
This is so false.
When has Britney ever ranked #1 on Forbes, under "Web Rank"? Gaga did, in 2010. Miley Cyrus
#2 Beyoncé, #3 Britney Spears. Close but not quite. |
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 1,670
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Anyway, again, Britney is just tabloid fodder.
|
Literally screaming when that is all Kim would ever be.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Eternium
This has me screaming. Kim Kardashian is a less talented Paris Hilton clone who couldn't get her music career off the ground and owes her entire career to her momager. She would be completely irrelevant right now if it weren't for Caitlyn and Kylie
Britney's moved almost 200M records, her perfumes have outgrossed Kim's career, she's had impact on other artists, has been famous for almost two decades, etc.
Kim's got 2-3 years left depending on how long Kylie and Kris can keep her afloat and will go down the way of Paris. She won't be remembered in ten years, let alone in 2099 |
It changes nothing in my post, which was:
TIME's Most Influential: Kim
World Leaders: Kim
Important conferences: Kim
Britney may have Star Magazine though. Britney's perfumes may have outgrossed Kim's career (not really a testament to Britney's power), yet Kim's videogame outgrossed Britney's residency and the Femme Fatale tour. Kim may not have still been famous without Kylie and Caitlyn, yet we can say that Britney wouldn't have gotten half of her media coverage without K-Fed and Justin Timberlake. Kim may have 2-3 years left, while Britney's time ran out 2-3 years ago. Cold world, huh?
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
Literally screaming when that is all Kim would ever be.
|
Again, TIME and the world leaders disagree.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 9/14/2010
Posts: 78,921
|
This is a rehash of the thread asking which celebrities are the most famous of the 21st century.
Clearly a certain fanbase is unhappy with the results. I don't know what's wrong with y'all. Continously arguing with the majority opinion. Does that not say something in itself? We don't agree. It's about time you accepted that Britney isn't as famous as you think she is and hasn't been for over a decade now.
Beyoncé, Kim Kardashian, Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga have all made major headlines this half the century.
Britney's most famous year was 2007 and that's nothing to boast about. Have some respect for your own fave.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 28,773
|
Britney never cared about politics so why use that? Lol if she wanted to meet leaders in 2000, she certainly had the star power to do so.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,099
|
Yes, absolutely!
Pay the haters no mind.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,527
|
She is, let's take in consideration we're talkibg about the 21st century and not the last couple of years
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/27/2012
Posts: 33,811
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lord Blackout
Britney never cared about politics so why use that? Lol if she wanted to meet leaders in 2000, she certainly had the star power to do so.
|
Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Kim doesn't care about politics either. But the fact is, when she goes to different countries, the leaders are requesting to meet with her. Obama tapped HER for help during the 2014 midterms.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/2/2014
Posts: 9,438
|
Quote:
Originally posted by J a y
This is a rehash of the thread asking which celebrities are the most famous of the 21st century.
Clearly a certain fanbase is unhappy with the results. I don't know what's wrong with y'all. Continously arguing with the majority opinion. Does that not say something in itself? We don't agree. It's about time you accepted that Britney isn't as famous as you think she is and hasn't been for over a decade now.
Beyoncé, Kim Kardashian, Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga have all made major headlines this half the century.
Britney's most famous year was 2007 and that's nothing to boast about. Have some respect for your own fave.
|
This post is wrong in so many ways, for starters Britney was wayyy wayy bigger as a celeb in 2000 than in 2007.
Second, Lady Gaga hasn't touched the headlines since 2011. So why even bring her?
Justin Bieber is the closest thing we had to Britney in recent years, we would have to combine his music career with Kim's and Beyonce's fame to get near to what Britney was as a celeb in the 2000's.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/24/2008
Posts: 35,091
|
Yeah I think so
Britney shaving her head, getting thrown into the back of an ambulance, and constant struggles with her children were major hot topics that no one could escape from during 2007. She was a huge tabloid fixture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
