I don't disagree, but I think a good amount of that coverage was sought after- probably with a good amount of parental "pushing". Anybody else remember the scantily clad 1999 Rolling Stone cover that she did @ 17 years old? As a 20 year-old myself at the time I certainly appreciated it
, but should it have been done in such a manner? As a parent, would you let your daughter pose like that @ 17 on a national magazine?
From that moment on, the press realized that there's nothing off limits with Britney, and she never did anything to dispel that theory.