By Adaeze Onwuelo

In our culture, celebrities are often raised to the levels of gods but simultaneously dehumanised into mere products without complex human emotions. Presumably, you can hurl insults and ceaseless media attention without it tainting their psyche. Celebrities are excessively venerated as well as relentlessly criticised and condemned repeatedly for minor ‘sins’ that we wouldn’t harshly condemn the average person for – like gaining a small amount of weight.

Just like us, celebrities can experience trauma, breakdowns and mental illness. Yet sometimes when we witness a celebrity’s descent, we are presented by the media with a spectacle riddled with humour, flippancy and trivialisation. This is possibly due to the lack of proximity we have to such stars; as a result, we acquire a lack of compassion. Additionally, since there is an extensive misconception that stardom offers protection from torment, it can make it even harder to empathise with them.

Jazz singer-songwriter Amy Winehouse and Pop-star Britney Spears both endured mental breakdowns in the public eye. Amy Winehouse suffered from bulimia nervosa and substance abuse disorder. The latter, unfortunately, killed her. Britney Spears suffered from bipolar disorder and smothering paparazzi. The perpetual media antagonism, rocky divorce and custody battle culminated in Britney Spears’ infamous breakdown in 2007 when she shaved off her hair. Both women checked into rehab multiple times and had severe mental health issues that needed to be addressed.

Both Amy and Britney endured the loss of a loved one. Amy lost her beloved Nan, Britney, her aunt. Both endured suffocation from the inescapable paparazzi that assailed their private life. Both had depraved management ruling them, pressuring them to perform despite being unwell. All these factors will have contributed to the development or advancement of mental disorders.

Despite their mental anguish, the media and the general public were ferocious. Talk show hosts produced strings of jokes at Amy’s expense, referring to Amy as a horse and jesting that her next album would revolve around crack cocaine. Commentators denounced Britney’s weight and her dazed and disoriented performance at the 2007 VMAs – the first major performance after her public breakdown.

Tabloids continued to conjure up salacious rumours and post personal reports on the stars’ lives. TV shows, magazines and social commentators would make light of the ongoing trauma of these women and brutally mock them. Instead of acknowledging that these women were being taken advantage of at the expense of their sanity, the media proceeded to harass them with their trademark joviality.

Media shapes our opinions, perceptions and foundational beliefs. By the media incessantly generating jokes, skits and flippant comments in reaction to mental health, we – the consumers of mass media – internalise those opinions and beliefs. Subsequently, when we observe an inebriated Amy performing and a manic Britney shaving off her hair, we respond in entertained pleasure instead of concern.

This is exemplified by fans blindly dancing and singing along to an evidently inebriated and bewildered Amy performing her hit ‘Rehab’, a song that concerns Amy boldly refusing to attend rehab for alcoholism. This holds a great amount of dramatic irony; we are relishing in a song regarding a woman rejecting help for alcoholism. All the while, she is performing drunk and drugged. But hey, as long as she’s providing us entertainment, it’s all good!

In retrospect, we are witnessing a dying woman, eerily cognisant of her eventual demise. We don’t need to lose a legend to recognise their talent and the extensive scope that their illness was encroaching on their lives. One would doubt that the same media that was disparaging Amy Winehouse for being drunk and drugged were the ones writing about her tragically passing away from alcoholism. This class of stars seem to withstand ridicule regarding their illness when they are alive. In death, they are met with the public’s constant and resounding wail: ‘we failed her!’ and ‘we should’ve done better!’

What cultural impact does this media treatment have on wider society? Imagine a young person entangled in the depths of manic-depression, grief or substance abuse. They have a wavering thought to reach out: tell a friend or a family member; to visit their local GP. Then, they open social media and see ruthless reactions to disordered stars. Tabloids insult their gaunt or growing appearance. Social media users enact skits, mocking their substance abuse disorder. The public laugh at manic episodes.

As they shut the app, their mouths follow suit. Subsequently, they become determined to keep their anguish hidden out of fear of a retributive backlash. And so, they continue to suffer in silence, their agony extended. By belittling disordered stars, a stigma is propagated into the minds of society, reinforcing the belief that mental disorders are something to be consumed and then speedily ridiculed.

We should treat mental breakdowns and mental disorders with compassion and sympathy, whether it be a celebrity or a non-celebrity. We should encourage rehabilitation, destigmatise therapy and advocate for sick individuals to get the help and support they need. Finally, we should cast a critical eye over the media that often adopts celebrities’ turbulence and torment as another pawn in their game for our entertainment.