Say what you will about her and her celebrity status, whether you think its deserving or not, but the media has seriously been on her ass since the whole brangelina debacle. They literally do not leave her alone, every month its the same article painting her some ruined woman. Shes not wrong.

Seriously I think I've read "Jen's pregnant" thousands of times checking out at the grocery store over the years.

For society, women are baby maker machines. If they dare don't have babies, they need to be punished. That's what the media is doing to her.

It's quite sad how tabloids and the media are able to use her in the way they do - imagine the BILLIONS of money stories about her must've bought these people that would literally have her murdered just to make a few more million in sales?

The celebrity tabloid thing really needs to get way tougher, it's crazy that people can publish photos and literal fiction without any penalty or concern for the impact upon that persons' life.

Being an actress should not mean the end of privacy.

When you're a public figure, that is essentially what it means

Im kind of over this argument. Surely when you enter the public arena some levels of privacy are going to be breached, but up until the 2000s it was never this relentless. Britneys whole mess being one of the most notable heights of tabloid lunacy. Sure you expect to get your picture taken casually, you except there to be some crazies out there, but at this point its like all about pure degradation. Taking people down. Its malicious.

Because we have the Internet. More people have the Internet now than in the 90s. Instantaneous communication and the need for clicks to drive profits is the name of the game.

Also celebrities are way more open now. You can still be a celeb and know how to keep things private. Britney just happened to lose control over that.

The press were just as invasive before the mid 2000s. Especially in the UK, look at Princess Diana. But Michael Jackson also got it too. The change around the mid 2000's that Britney was used as the prototype for was the translation from grocery tabloid magazines to 24/7 coverage through the internet.

Internet/social media has everything to do with it of course.
Im just saying, im tired of people using the "well...when you become an actress/musician you lose your human right to some semblance of privacy". Like nah, this isnt 2006 anymore. its no longer a new phenomena. lets choose to evolve.

they actually werent this invasive. princess diana, being royalty, was a great exception and i was going to mention her in my previous post actually. its because of the internet/social media that it got this way which all started rising immensely in the 2000s. Thats why people like Paris Hilton became international phenoms, it was like she was one of the first celebrities to truly go viral.

Girl log off and grow a sense of morality.

This is not an excuse anymore. There's being a celebrity and accepting that people are gonna freak out over you, and take pictures off you and ask for things in public, and there's harrassing someone and straight up publishing disgusting lies about them.

Did people not learn from Britney and Amy Winehouse and the devastation caused by the toxicity in these publications?

The whole world and gossip entertainment gawked as Amy Winehouse spiraled out of control and lost her life as result, and never once paused to think about their own role in her death.

I don't like the "If you are a celeb this is what you should be ready for." Like that's stupid, a lot of musicians don't follow music to become famous, they do it because music is what they're good at.

It's almost like telling people to not strive to be successful cause if they get "too" successful they'll have to suffer the consequences of privacy invasion.

Like it's time to stop accepting it and to start addressing it - if I were a skilled performer and suddenly amassed a following, I would not then naturally accept the fact that my relationships and feelings were open to public spectacle. Fk that.

So, where should the line be drawn? Currently, public figures have a reduced right to privacy and cannot win a libel lawsuit unless it can be proven that the person wrote the libelous article about them with malicious intent.

she is absolutely right

Even though I agree with her, she shouldn't be SO dramatic about it. After all, thanks to all those tabloids she has kept herself relevant cause lets be real her acting career has been the pits ever since Friends ended & all her recent projects have BOMBED.

So yeah, even though I agree with her points, she would be NOTHING without all those trashy tabloids + their fake stories

I don't think she will ever have a baby, I bet it's annoying to read your pregnant all the time but I don't think it's that big of a deal just ignore and move on, she knows she's not pregnant and so does her hubby.

So you're saying that she should be thankful that these trashy tabloids have kept her relevant by painting her to be some broken woman who is longing for a child? What?