Let it be known that I don't care about Justin Bieber. Don't hate him, don't like him... just never think about him. I mean, he's cute and perfect for America, the end. The only time I've ever willingly written about him was when he proved to ODB's ghost that Wutang Clan was, in fact, something to fuck with.
This was originally posted on Buzznet, of which I am the Executive Editor. I work my ass off and barely ever get to write anything - I'm more of a business manager who oversees editorial, programming and productivity. But our Music Editor Bree posted about this today and I had to get to typing further because you know, HOOO MAH GAD. Here tis:
Today in news that will likely be blown out of proportion: Justin Bieber spoke to Rolling Stone, and although the full article isn't in our possession, the gossip blogs are jumping on the pull-quotes and scandalizing the "highlights."
Case in point: Justin Bieber doesn't believe in abortion. He believes that an embryo is life and that having an abortion "is like killing a baby." He is religious and shares this sentiment with millions of other people, but it's a strong statement to make when your voice has exponential reach and you know that kids everywhere are listening to you. It won't be long before the pro-lifers and pro-choicers start battling this out.
This brings up a larger discussion about sensationalized journalism. It's expected that reporters for established publications like Rolling Stone will pose "hard-hitting" questions to America's idols, as interviews with these stars are hard to get and we all want to know as much as we can about the rich and famous. But is asking a sixteen-year old pop star who has focused on his career full time since age thirteen about post-rape abortion and politics really fair? Not to underestimate Justin Bieber, or any young pop stars, but asking a kid these types of questions seems a bit biased.
Plus, Justin's fans don't seem that interested in learning about these issues. In the video of his Terry Richardson shoot, he answers fans' questions about food, a Michael Jackson/TuPac collaboration, and what he'd take with him in a fire.
Watch the video clip HERE
No one is saying that we only want to know about Justin Bieber's hair and girlfriends, but as potentially irresponsible as it is for Bieber to try and answer some of the Rolling Stone questions with any real authority, it's just as absurd to ask him questions which deserve more serious answers. At what point do we stop trying to take someone as far out of their element as possible just because they are famous? Who is the commodity here? Bieber or Rolling Stone magazine?
We can't fully form an opinion on this article until we get our mitts on the full piece (out on February 18th to subscribers), but we're feeling weird about his undeveloped opinions being printed and publicized. Bieber is talented and beloved by millions, but his frontal lobe cannot be trusted (yet)! No, seriously, here's an article on the neuroscience of a teenage brain. So let's give the kid a break for now. We're already wretching at the backlash he will face from some of his statements.
However, from what we can gather his intentions are good. On homosexuality, Bieber says, "It's everyone's own decision to do that. It doesn't affect me and shouldn't affect anyone else."
Well-played, Biebs. For now, until you have experienced the world, it's best to answer these loaded questions with grace and focus on your career, which is all about making teenage girls swoon and the rest of us dance.
Thoughts? Feelings? Pfffts?