Big changes are afoot for Britney Spears. At a court hearing on 29 September, Spears' father Jamie was finally suspended as her conservator, to be temporarily replaced with an accountant chosen by the singer's legal team, after Judge Brenda Penny called the existing situation 'untenable' and reflective of 'a toxic environment'.
Outside the court in Los Angeles, the singer's lawyer Mathew Rosengart told joyful fans: 'It's a great day for Britney Spears and it's a great day for justice', continuing: 'Britney Spears has been faced with a decade-long nightmare, a Kafkaesque nightmare, orchestrated by her father and others.' (Jamie, who had previously filed to be removed as conservator, did not comment but has always claimed he was acting in his daughter's interests.)
Britney did not immediately respond directly, but was clearly in celebratory mood as she posted a video on Instagram showing her flying a plane for the first time, with a caption saying she was on 'cloud 9'.
The move could also signal the beginning of the end for the controversial conservatorship itself, a legal arrangement that Spears has called 'abusive' and alleges has been used control every aspect of her life, from her career to her ability to have children. 'It’s been 13 years and it’s enough,' she said during testimony in June this year. 'I deserve to have a life.'
At the same time, there has been a deluge of new documentaries about Spears. Along with films from CNN and Netflix, the New York Times has followed up the explosive Framing Britney Spears, released earlier this year, with the equally incendiary Controlling Britney Spears.
It shares new and horrifying claims about the intense – and potentially illegal – surveillance Spears has allegedly been subjected to while under the conservatorship, including the monitoring of her private phone communications and audio recording devices planted in her bedroom. It also detailed the level of control wielded over Spears, with claims made that the singer wasn’t allowed to buy sushi or shoes (under the conservatorship, Spears does not have control of her estimated $60 million fortune). In a statement to the New York Times, Jamie Spears’s lawyer has denied the allegations.
Now, it’s time to consider what freedom for Britney could really mean: emancipation from the control of her father, yes, but surely also autonomy over her own story.
The role these films have played in this saga is complex. While both New York Times documentaries have raised public awareness of the situation and helped progress the case, the sheer volume of content produced about Spears and her situation leaves a bitter taste: at what point does it stop being informative and become exploitative?
Context is important, but most documentaries seem set on rehashing that difficult period between 2007 and 2008 that led up to implementation of the conservatorship, complete with distressing paparazzi images and footage of Spears at her very lowest. It’s a focus that Spears herself says has left her feeling embarrassed.
In recent days, she posted on Instagram to say: 'I watched a little bit of the last documentary and I hate to inform you but a lot of what you heard is not true', albeit later tweaking her post to say 'I must say I scratched my head a couple of times' (which documentary she was referring to was not clear, but a source told the New York Post it was the CNN film). In a May post, Spears also called out what she saw as hypocrisy on the part of documentary-makers: 'They criticize the media and then do the same thing?'
While the intentions of the filmmakers may differ from those of the paparazzi, her life is pored over on screen in forensic detail, with private information, including medical treatment, served up with little hesitation. There are interviews with doctors, lawyers, friends and at times questionable sources. Netflix’s Britney vs Spears even dragged out former boyfriend, paparazzo Adnan Ghalib, and one-time manager Sam Lutfi, who the Spears family allege was drugging Spears between 2007 and 2008 (Lutfi denies the claims). Neither Ghalib or Lutfi are quizzed about their own involvement or attempts to control Spears’s life; instead they’re given a shot at vindication.
As these films dissect her life – some with more sensitivity than others – Spears herself remains absent; her involvement relegated to archival footage, old interviews and her heart-breaking yet fiery testimony from June’s hearing. The documentaries have brought pressure on those involved in her life to respond to the #FreeBritney moment, yet Spears’s trauma is still being commodified - if in a less tasteless way than before.
Now, it’s time to consider what freedom for Britney could really mean: emancipation from the control of her father, yes, but surely also autonomy over her own story. Perhaps, the next documentary should be helmed by her, should she choose to make one. And if she decides not to? Well, that’s her prerogative.
READ MORE: 'End Of A Decade Long Nightmare' Britney Spears' Father Suspended As Conservator