I’ve come to a very controversial…damn near, revolutionary…realization: this annoyance, this damned frustration I feel every time I go on to a Britney forum is not about Britney, it’s the FANS!!! 

Before people start with the oh-so-predictable “you’re making excuses for her”, and the utterly illogical “you’re blaming everyone, but her”, let me set some things straight from the get-go:

1. Britney has issues! Lots of them. Whether they are substance related, emotional disorders, trust-and-betrayal paranoia, or just plain old insanity, this is not a woman at her best. Despite her efforts, and the efforts of those around her, her life is a mess right now.
2. That mess spills over onto her public life, her career, her image, how she’s viewed as a woman and a mother, and ultimately will affect (is affecting) her sons.
3. Britney needs help. Personally, I don’t think rehab is the solution. It’s obvious that not all her issues are substance related, so I’m more in agreement with Sharon Osbourne who recently suggested that Britney would benefit from doing an extensive therapy course.

Britney fan sites are invariably overrun with three types of nuisances: The trolls (idle people with limited decency, and less intelligence who find sport in attacking and criticizing without merit); The disillusioned fans (the ones sitting on the fence who cannot seem to decide whether to move on, or not, but in the meantime find it necessary to log on every day and explain…ad nauseum…how disappointed/upset/betrayed they feel); and last, but not least, The proverbial ex-fan (that unexplained phenomenon, that person who willingly admits that he/she is no longer a fan, has no use for Britney or her music, has stopped listening to the Britney albums they previously enjoyed, yet still manages to find endless time in their avowedly busy schedule to come online and discuss, berate and analyse this person they no longer have any interest in).

So that those of us who remain in the fan community, to support and celebrate and still enjoy Britney, must therefore share space with these people and frankly I’ve lost all patience with this!

Britney’s antics, her unabashed down-home attitude, her occasional lack of underwear, her more frequent missteps and blatant bad decisions, the unkind, but unfortunate truth that she is often her own worst enemy, all these things worry me as a fan, sadden me as a person to see how hard and how badly she’s fallen, but none of them have the ability to make me want to kick my computer off it’s desk in sheer and utter frustration. No, only the Britney fans can provoke such ire. 

I’m tired of the endless tirades, the litany of complaints, of seeing every photograph be analysed first and foremost to spot the imperfections, the watching and re-watching of every paparazzi video to catch the two-second lapse she may make, the endless debates over every word she says or doesn’t say, over every emotion she shows or doesn’t show, over every otherwise insignificant day-to-day choice she makes or doesn’t make.

I’m tired of the assumption that we…the fans, the people who only see snapshots of her life, or know fragments of her story told us by the tabloid media, that ever faithful, never biased, unblemished-in-their-objectivity fountain of truth…that we know best how to run her life. (Please note that I’ve already conceded that she has made a mess running it herself. My contention is that I hate the innate arrogance and blatant stupidity that makes complete strangers assume that they know how to flawlessly manage her affairs). I’m tired of the bitching, of the sniping, of the jaded nostalgia which ignores the problems of the past and repaints it with glorious perfection.

Express your displeasure, state your annoyance, discuss the changes you wish she would make: we’d all be hypocrites if we said we thought she was perfect. She was never perfect! But for God’s sake, be a person, be a human, use your brain and get off that damn self-righteous soapbox so many people have been crowding onto for the last four years. That’s what really pisses me off, not the crap Britney pulls. The crap I have to endure to get a few moments in a fan community.

If I could be bothered to do it, I could go through his story line by line and point out the inconsistencies. Like she hates to be touched, but pictures show her touching and being touched by people and holding hands all the time. She bends over naked in front of you but you're not supposed to look at her ass. And so on. I really don't have the time to go on with it. The fat one has poured out just about everything he could think of, everything including the kitchen sink, and more than anybody needs to hear. Basically, he has just snowed everybody with mounds of irrelevant detail so it's hard to pick the bones out of it.

I kind of admire his determination to get his 15 minutes of fame by selling out the person he says he was totally loyal to and would take a bullet for. If all he was motivated by was concern for her kids, why trash every single aspect of her life right down to her personal hygiene? People say she's sweet, kind and generous, "has a big heart" etc. so surely she must have SOME redeeming features? But Tony can't think of a single one.

Even though Laura Wasser dismissed him as "not a credible witness" and even though Commissioner Scott Gordon's condition-setting for Britney didn't exactly reflect a concern that Britney's boys were in real and present danger, Fat Tony dribbles - and dribbles and dribbles - all this drivel to..... well, the News Of The World of course.

This is the UK-based Sunday tabloid that has been printing an endless stream of dubious, manufactured and generally defamatory stories about Britney for at least 3 years. Everybody with any contact with Britney, no matter how remote, knows the News Of The World will pay for their story, so long as it's a shocking expose.

If it's true as Fat Tony says that Britney finds having the kids a nuisance and really can't be bothered with them, why doesn't she just let Kevin take over as primary custodian? She'd still have extensive visitation rights but very few responsibilities - other than to pay Kevin about twice as much as she does now.

A lot of this sounds like Tony making up what he thinks might sound like a good story. Despite his alleged experience in narcotic-related matters, he seems pretty confused about the details of Brit's alleged drug taking and his accounts of her behavior under drugs sound like something he imagines might happen, rather than something that actually does happen.

It'll be interesting to see if any of her other bodyguards come forward to claim their $20,000 from the News Of The World.

All we had to write about to wrap things up would be Britney's inevitable and imminent retirement from the music business, the equally inevitable and imminent loss of her kids to Kevin Federline (we knew that was going to happen without a shadow of doubt - Fox News, CNN and almost all the UK tabloids told us so) and her probable and widely predicted suicide.

Should we just change the name of the site to Beyonceology and get it over and done with? Ms Knowles is an ever-reliable, solid-gold star, about whom nothing mean or bad will ever be written. Jason and I would never again wake our families up with our screaming as a result of yet another Britney nightmare. Things would always run smoothly, punctually and on time.

We wouldn't have to worry about ugly candid pictures of Beyonce, or Beyonce having a bad hair day. X17 wouldn't capture pictures of her bald head or her naked vagina, nor would they depict her looking glum, depressed, angry, tearful or crazy. In every picture she always looks the same. The same composed demeanor, the same professional smile, the same flawless make-up, the same neat, blonde extensions.

And we wouldn't have to cope with any inappropriate allegations concerning her body. Beyonce is never fat, she's curvy, ultra-feminine, "bootylicious". Her boobs are mid-size, not controversially big or pitiably small. They certainly don't seem to get bigger and smaller like Britney's. Beyonce's butt is almost indefinable - nobody really knows what size or shape it is so it's possible to project our own fantasies on it and call it perfect.

But no sooner had we considered Beyonceology than we uncovered a fatal flaw in our idea. With Beyonce being almost in the deity class, "the same, yesterday, today and forever", there would be precious little to write about, discuss, debate, analyse, defend, fight over, get animated about, shake our heads sadly about, think hard about, get judgmental and superior about, feel sorry for, and cry over. There would be no need to pray to God on her behalf.

But with Britney Spears we do all those things. Britney is not the kind of star who only dips in and out of your life when she's touring, on TV or has a new record out. We don't only see her when she wants our money. She's a kind of celebrity for all seasons. We watch fascinated, day after day. If there are no candid pix of her we wonder why not and get withdrawal symptoms. And more than that, we care and become involved. We share in her joy, her elation, her desolation, her tragedy.

Through our daily observation of the Britney Spears Story we have in front of us a paradigm - the most glaring and blatant, the most cruel and pitiless day-to-day, endless working out of the cynicism and mendacity of the media. The publication of contradicting stories on the same day. The fabrication of malice. The use of misleading captions. The techniques of smearing. It's all there and we as Britney fans are almost privileged in having an unparalleled opportunity to be aware of it, to study it and to become wiser, kinder, more understanding and more generous as a result.

On occasions like this we usually have the self appointed Guardians of the Truth complaining about people "making excuses". Fer f@ck sake, this is a post mortem and we're looking for explanations, not excuses. It's only natural that people would want an explanation for such a disappointing "performance" from an artist who is famous for her performing skills above everything else. This is a woman who once shared a stage with Michael Jackson and almost literally made him look small!

One encouraging thing I've found is that many people have re-focused on the new single and how good it is. And rightly so - the best thing about the new Britney era is that her singing seems to be stronger, more mature and even more interesting in 2007 than it was in 2003. And, since the only experience of Britney most of us are likely to have over the next year will be to hear her new album a few hundred times, that's a better reason to remain a fan than disappointment at one live performance of one song is to abandon her.

It's sad but true that an artist (like a sports player) is "as good as their last performance" - so right now most of us are ready to accept that Britney as a stage performer is pretty much over. But (like we always have to remind ourselves about big losers in a sports context) this is a class performer we're talking about. She had a bad day - the worst. But she has pedigree. Justine Henin getting beaten at Wimbledon by Marianne Bartoli didn't make her a bad player overnight, even though some tennis experts were picking around for signs of an implosion and some even thought they'd found them. Like Justine, Britney will probably come out and give us an amazing performance next time - even more so because she has to prove her critics wrong and justify herself to the world.

However, there is one sad and serious possibility that has to be addressed - if it's true that Britney's tending to do only the most lightweight choreography now, to avoid a possible knee collapse, then she may as well give up the "all singing, all lip-synching" style of performance. Think about it - if she hadn't danced at all, but had just stood at a mic, smiled, waved to the crowd and sung live reasonably competently while her dancers danced, nobody would've complained. Maybe it's time for her to go back to the drawing board, think the unthinkable, accept that she's an ex-dancer but still a singer (and potentially a great one) and bring on a totally new era where she has a hell of a better chance to get respect than she has with tentative dancing and lip-synching.

On BBC-TV's "Last Night of the Proms" last weekend, I watched classical Russian soprano Anna Netrebko run around the stage jinking between the orchestra members, do long and elaborate pirhouettes, and throw flowers at audience members, while simultaneously singing a substantial aria from classical operetta and never wavering or missing a beat! She did all this while wearing a stunning, all-enveloping gown, and looked absolutely gorgeous. This shows me that the game of performance has well and truly moved on.

It's time for Britney to take stock of things and consider her own place in the world of showbiz. She needs to accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative and start planning how she can maximise her wonderful talents so as to continue as a world-class performer far into the future.

In many parts of the world, there just aren't any mainstream, peak-time music TV shows anymore, and channels like MTV are no more than shadows of their former selves. I'm NOT surprised that folks don't have the time to sit and watch 100 videos and 100 ad breaks in the hope of seeing the one they're actually interested in, but I AM surprised that TV executives don't reckon there's a market for a show featuring hot young celebs from the world of music..... maybe they'll suddenly reinvent the genre again some time in the future? I mean, there HAS to come a time when TV audiences get tired of the endless Simon Cowell audition shows, right?

But anyway. We're in a new era when most of the pop music audience is tuned into the online world where we have 24/7 real-time updates of everything that's happening. Any new music that's out there seems to leak instantly or be available for download somewhere - and aside from THAT, there's the whole industry of legal digital downloading for instant gratification and there's the strange effect it has on the charts.

For a while, in the pre-download era, a record's debut placement was the highest point it would ever reach, then it was downhill all the way. Now, a record can be No.25 one week and No.1 the next. Also, records that stick at No.1 are pretty commonplace now and that also seems to be an effect of people browsing around and downloading in the comfort of their home instead of having to go out, drive into town, park their cars and try to find one of the ever-decreasing number of stores that actually sells singles.

The thing is, the "buzz effect" in this new era comes about in a completely different way. It's all about "good word of mouth". You find out about the hot new sounds from people talking about them. You forget or aren't even aware that Mariah Carey's or Nelly Furtado's previous album tanked. It doesn't matter anyway. We're not buying within a continuous process of loyal artist-support any more. We're just buying whatever people are talking about, and one great single is enough to get everybody talking.

Artists have to be aware of that. Britney may have made an incredible new video, but how are we going to get to see it? It won't be in our faces on rotation on TV screens everywhere, the way things used to be. The sages who used to claim that sexy videos MADE us buy records by talentless female stars, by a process of brainwashing and despite our better judgment, can shut up now. That's not an avenue that's well-traveled anymore, even if it was a popular route at one time. Anyone wanting to see a video now has to go seek it out, so it becomes a collector's piece for fans more than a promo. In fact, it's arguable that making pop videos is a waste of time and money now.

The ONLY way to get hits now is to get everybody talking positively and excitedly about your music. Having a media tie-in like featuring in a hit movie or being the background to a TV ad are a couple of great ways to do it. Appearing on chat shows is still a valid approach. But there's nothing better than being seen by millions of people around the world, many of whom will scarcely have heard of you and many more of whom will not be as immersed in the aura of loserdom that the US and UK tabloids may have tried to confer on you.

Appearing at the VMAs is like holding a golden ticket. You can't afford to pass up that kind of chance these days as there simply is NO comparable alternative. It was her spectacular appearances at the VMAs and other award shows that made Britney Spears a megastar and not just a popular young singer all those years ago. This is her chance to remind people WHY she's important enough to be "the most talked-about woman in America".

And this is why she'll be there, despite her nerves about getting onstage, despite her worries about events in her private life, and despite her obvious dislike of events like this.

This is a traditional style of bluesy ballad with an extremely retro feel, but it's the kind of music Britney sang for her own pleasure before she went to Jive so it's familiar territory to her. Songs like this were often recorded in the decades from the 1950s to the 1980s. The "telephone call" part may seem like an anomaly, but those old-style soul ballads and hurtin' songs did often have spoken verses.

It's interesting to hear her press the "loud" button a few times and show us that her voice isn't the weak whisper some imagine it to be. I get the impression she could go even louder and emote with even more anguish, but Britney's singing has always been about thoughtfulness and restraint rather than belting. I've never believed that she was UNABLE to sing out like this. I always felt that it was a stylistic choice she made, and since "In The Zone" was her "Erotica", it was appropriate for her to use a high, sexy, breathy voice.

Why has it come out now? Well, couldn't it be the first shot in her custody-and-general-PR campaign against Kevin? She's not likely to start digging up dirt about Kevin or flinging muckraking allegations - that's not her style. Looking back a few years, she never said anything bad or malicious about the break up with Justin, except to remark once that he never had time for her.

Britney likes to use her art to make her points, and that's what she's doing here. The song will get massive publicity, loads of influential showbiz commentators will hear it, and suddenly Kevin will be starting to look, not like the Solid Citizen and Dad Of The Year, but like a pretty useless kind of guy who can't be relied on to provide any kind of emotional support, stability or reliability for anybody - whether it be Shar, Britney, or his sons.

"The pair held hands as they left the infamous gay club Pan where she was partying with Kevin and her dancers. One reveller revealed at the time: 'They seemed really close. Britney was on Kevin's knee and this girl was sitting next to them. She and Britney were giggling all the time. At one point Britney stood up and danced round the table.' The pair caught a cab to Britney's £350-a-night suite at the Marriott hotel at 5am, followed by K-Fed and another man. The reveller added: 'Britney was all over the brunette in the cab. They went upstairs together at the hotel.'

Federline realised that night was central to his case against Britney and sent private detectives to scour Europe looking for the girl. When they found her he sent his closest aide — a person he trusts with his life — to speak to the girl and persuade her to join him against Britney."

There are so many problems with this story that it makes you wonder just how many grains of truth ANY similar article actually contains - let's look at some of them:

Kevin was there too, with Britney and the girl. So why doesn't it reflect on HIS character?

If he thought it was such bad behavior that it would affect Britney's ability to be a responsible citizen and parent in the future, why didn't he put a stop to it?

This was in 2004 and he had plenty of opportunity not to marry Britney if he thought she was a lesbian (or generally oversexed) so why did he go ahead with it?

If this makes her a bad mother and role-model, why did he decide to have children with her in the years ahead? And why didn't he complain about it a lot sooner?

Kevin's past behavior is very far from ideal-parent material, but he's trying to put all that behind him. Yet he seems to be suggesting that Britney's behavior as far back as 2004 should still be held against her.

I don't know.... Is Federline stupid, or is the News of the World?

The Sun's Victoria Newton claimed "my pictures show her pawing him". Well, I looked and I looked but I couldn't see it. I also couldn't see her bare breasts or any nudity whatever - we were expected to believe it because we were TOLD to believe it. And as for "seducing" the guy? Well, firstly he himself said that no sex took place and secondly he was more than willing to participate.

Yet the UK's "Daily Star" has manufactured at least THREE dubious stories out of Britney's brief dip in the hotel pool. No.1 - Shock Horror at her alleged TOPLESS romp. No.2 - "Britney is likely to lose her kids because of her NAKED pool romp." No.3 - "Britney's naked LESBIAN romp". I daresay we'll soon have No.4 - "Kevin claims victory - Britney to lose custody over naked lesbian romp".

In the third of these they claim that the "shocking" pictures show her kissing Shannon Funk. But what they actually show is Shannon Funk kissing HER. They then reinvent the story they previously printed about the GUY she allegedly seduced going to her room and finding her waiting for him "with her legs up". They NOW say he went to her room and found her making out with Shannon Funk! Well I dunno..... my memory's no good but even I can remember what they said a just few days ago.

Jordan Miller at BreatheHeavy had a pic showing Shannon Funk naked beside the pool, standing with a naked guy who looks suspiciously familiar. Meanwhile, Britney is nowhere to be seen. Why isn't THIS pic in the tabloids? And could it be that these two people know each other a lot better than the tabloids have tried to suggest? What might they be planning?

But anyway, as I was saying, I thought this was the bottom of the barrel but NO! This week, "Star" magazine has a front cover claiming that Britney told her babies they were both MISTAKES!!!!! Well now, that seems strange, considering she told People magazine, just after her marriage, about her intention to have a baby within the next year, and that's on public record.

But wait! What is the source of this bizarre allegation? Why, it's "Kevin's secret custody files". How surprising. And how balanced and responsible of The Star to print his literally incredible allegations with no rebuttal from Britney's side - right in the middle of a custody battle.

AND, if his file really IS "secret", how come its contents are in Star Magazine? Could it be that Kevin fed them the story? Could it be that people who are ill-disposed towards Britney (such as Kevin and his friends and associates) or staff who have been fired (such as incompetent nannies and PAs) are actually the sources for most of the smears and fiction that have recently been presented as fact?

The thing she said that struck me hardest was "I don't feel like I know what sort of person Britney is anymore". Well, I guess I could comment that she probably NEVER knew what kind of person Britney was, if she thinks the Britney we're seeing now is some kind of demon compared to the angel she previously perceived. Ms Spears was always a hell of a lot more complicated than most of us realised, even back in those seemingly-innocent days.

Anyway, this is what I said to her:

"I find it strange that you say you don't know what kind of person she is anymore, because I feel quite close to her right now. That sense of trying to be defiant and independent even while you're being overwhelmed by circumstances, pretending (and saying) you're happy more to convince yourself than anyone else, the fear of analysing yourself too much (or, in her case, letting an interviewer analyse you) in case the whole fragile delusion of your supposedly calm and happy life just crumbles in pieces before your eyes and you realise you've lost everything, the feeling that people close to you are just saying things they want you to hear but when you're out of the room are saying something totally different.... I am right there with her.

But on top of THAT she has everything she does being magnified out of all proportion and written about in as malicious a way as possible, AND lies on top of lies on top of lies being told about her to the point that she must feel herself that her life actually isn't hers anymore but belongs to the tabloids.

How must she feel to see so much hatred and malice being directed towards her? If she ever visited Perez or TMZ she would see pages of vicious remarks by visitors to those sites. Then, when she thinks about her own fans, there was all the trouble and adverse publicity Ruben Garay created for her by claiming to be closing down her biggest fansite, WoB (and never admitting that it wasn't even his to close down and that it's still there, but under new management) - I got the impression that it really hurt her.

Can you see how she would feel when she looks around her and wonders if ANYBODY loves her? I sometimes feel like the only thing standing between Britney and suicide is her two little boys who she loves more than life itself.

Maybe I'm naive and silly, but I FEEL so badly for her, I want to reach out to her and send her my love and sympathy and I do NOT want to add one single piece of trouble to her woes, even if it's one little disapproving remark."