A Touch of Class: Brooke Shields Stands Up for Britney Spears

I must admit I truly dislike all the negative, headline grabbing press, buzzing around the group of poorly behaved, very high profile celebrities. It can be compared to buzzards circling around dying carrion, waiting to feast on the fallen. Of course buzzards have been known to pick at the dying animal to help the process along. I just think there is so much more out there to be interested in, rather than celebrity trash news. It even seems to have invaded the regular news shows and sites, which I personally find idiotic. They perpetuate the stupidity, and follow like sheep.

I dislike it so much, that I won't even read 99 percent of the articles that are constantly thrown at us across bold headlines or in attention seeking photographs. If I see it coming up on some television show, I change the channel instantly, in protest. If someone else wants to watch it or read it, I don't really care, that is why we have such a variety of information available on the web, television and print news. There is something for everyone. That just doesn't happen to be my particular cup of tea.

The power of the finger on a remote control button or a computer keyboard is very satisfying, when I want to void out the trash gossip news, that seems to be flooding all venues.

Can you imagine if that much effort was constantly put out by powerful press sources, to do some good in the world? It does happen sometimes, and it is nice to see a celebrity make positive use of his or her celebrity status, in order to focus on something beyond themselves, that really needs the spotlight.

A case in point for me in particular, would be Angelina Jolie and the attention that she brings to children worldwide, a subject very near and dear to my heart. I am quite aware that in many cases the additional press does them no harm in box office or music sales, in fact often boosts their popularity. To me though, that celebrity example, at least tries to put something positive out in our cosmos. Whether you like her or not, or whether you doubt her motives or not, at least she is using her well known name and face in a way that tries to help. A child's welfare is important. Shock news is not, but it entertains many people, so it won't be going away anytime soon.

Another celebrity that comes to mind is Michael J. Fox and his fight for research and funding to find a cure for Parkinson's disease. All kinds of aspersions have been thrown at him, suggesting he is playing up his illness, and so forth, but the man is not sitting on his derriere, spouting nonsense. He is trying to use his celebrity voice to make something positive happen.

On the flip side, we have someone like Tom Cruise and his dogmatic promotion of Scientology. That is his choice and many others, so be it. I can respect his free choice, but I don't need a celebrity pushing his, what I consider near cult group devotion, on to the public constantly, ad naseum. That isn't positive air time. It is abuse of celebrity status.

Here I am though, writing about a celebrity snippet I ran across, without realizing at first, who the subject matter was referring to until I read the piece. This, I thought, was a bit of class, shown in the midst of media shock journalism and surprisingly, a kind and possible alternate explanation, of the infamous Ms. Britney Spear's behavior of late. I like to find positive spins on things.

My loving and brilliant mother taught me, amongst other things, that what I put out in this world comes back at me ten fold, sometimes in many unexpected ways. It was kind of nice to see Brooke Shields throw out something constructive, in the midst of a destructive hullabaloo.

I came across the news clip in Baby Talk magazine, of all places, when I had to take my daughter to the pediatrician.

It basically said that Brooke Shields thought there might be a possibility that the now sadly infamous Britney, Spears, my words not hers, may possibly be suffering from some form of postpartum depression, something she herself is no stranger to. Brooke was hit with this type of depression after the birth of her own child. She even wrote a book about it called Down Came the Rain in 2005.

In the article she was said to have told the magazine that what new moms need is compassion and support and offered Britney someone to talk to, in the personage of herself, if Britney wanted to. Now that is putting something positive out there, whether or not her personal assessment of the situation is correct, and it struck me in a good way. Surprisingly it made me pause and wonder if she might be right. It was a different way to look at it, with a gracious and unjudgmental attitude coming from Brooke Shields.

She is no stranger herself, to negative shock press. The hoopla that surrounded her part in the 1978 film "Pretty Baby", which portrayed the then very young child actor, in what was felt by many at the time, a questionable choice of movie role for a very young girl to play.

Then along came the Calvin Klein ads she did. Visually and photographically speaking, they apparently did have a sort of striking appeal, but they were considered tasteless at the time by many people. They featured a 15 year old, very sweet looking girl saying, "Nothing comes between me and my Calvins" in a blatantly suggestive way. It did what it was supposed to do though, as an advertising campaign. It sold jeans for Calvin Klein. It also instantly created a lot of negative press for a very young Brooke Shields and caused speculation surrounding the judgment of the adults with influence, in her life, at the time.

Once she had been in the press for those, the shock press was always on the hunt for more to splash across the tabloid pages. So she does have an inkling, of what that kind of destructive press coverage can do to a person, celebrity or not. In my book, her show of class, in trying to find a decent or alternate explanation for Britney's publicity stunts and rebellions, was very classy and down to earth. We only get presented one side, in most of the tabloid shock news,and they do such a slam bam job of it, that many wouldn't listen to an explanation of it anyhow, particularly not after the press has brainwashed everyone with their grand and often twisted versions of events.

The tabloids seem to take almost sadistic, and definitely very selfish and greedy pleasure in not only digging up, but many times creating the very situations that get reported about, over and over and over. It comes from every possible angle, until the story is rung like a sponge, and wiped in our faces, every way we turn. They are often guilty of creating the very pain the celebrities are left to deal with, whether they want to or not.

Believe it or not, there are actually actors and musicians that practice their craft for the fulfillment and joy of it, and don't really want the press in their faces all the time. Enjoying performing in front of a camera or being onstage, is a very different beast than seeking publicity from the publicity hounds. Just because someone may choose to make a career out of something in the field of entertainment, does not mean they are asking for a constant following of obnoxious people spying on their personal lives, at every turn, and not everybody wants to see that either. Certain types of media coverage are good and productive for their lives and careers, but trash and tabloid magazines mostly promote and distort the negative for shock value and greed, not to promote good works.

It is true that a lot of celebrities love the attention, in whatever form it comes. They make a point of drawing it to themselves. In fact if they didn't they wouldn't have reached the heights of publicity stardom they have. Take the very spoiled Paris Hilton for example. Her family name gave her the in, and her attention seeking behavior has launched her into outer space, and sadly the tabloids can't seem to get enough of it. They seek it out like monkeys picking nits.

Personally, I don't see the big draw. Again that is my own opinion, to which I am rightfully entitled, but I have more interesting or important things to see out there in my view of a much bigger world. Some of those things never see the light of a camera, or the print on a page, and that is just fine with me.

There is a certain amount of responsibility choosing a career in the public eye, but that doesn't mean they are obligated to live their personal lives under a fully lit microscope all the time, and I personally do not feel it is my right to expect them to. I surely would not like that invasion of my own privacy, but then again, I have no desire to be a celebrity.

Bravo to Brooke, for both trying to diffuse the constant barrage of negative press coverage, and for putting a different light and spin on something, whether it is correct or not, thereby making us stop and question that the information presented by the tabloid reporters and photographers, is not always precisely how it is presented to us.

Gone are the long ago days of true and 100 percent journalistic integrity, or maybe those days were never really there to begin with, but instead something we aspire to, in our quest to write about the world around us.