That is the question ... but what's the right thing to do? The other day I read an article about Britney Spears being in Australia to start her current tour. Click here if you want to read it. Apparently, some people are upset over the fact that she will be lip-syncing the show and not actually singing it. A source close to her said that Britney just isn't capable of singing and dancing at the same time. I don't know why, but I thought that was funny. It reminded me of a time when my in-laws took my girls to spend a weekend at Disneyland. The girls told us about my mother-in-law yelling at her husband in the car because she had missed a sign and went the wrong way. "I can't read and drive at the same time!" she yelled. That's just funny to me. Okay, so my MIL can't read and drive at the same time. Britney can't sing and dance at the same time. Isn't it funny how Britney can drink a Frappachinno and drive at the same time, or hold her baby on her lap and drive at the same time? I guess she has priorities.
Anyway, the Australian government isn't too happy about this and are considering enforcing new measures that would require artists to notify fans that they will be lip-syncing. Apparently, Britney's tour manager says fans come for the "pop spectacular experience" and that her not singing isn't a big deal. What do you think? Would you rather watch Britney Spears lip-sync and dance? Or would you prefer to hear her actually singing? Now, I know a lot of artists sound way better on album than they ever do on stage, so I understand Britney's side of this. However, I do agree that it should be made public before someone dishes out $1500 for a ticket. I think artists owe at least that much to their fans. What they choose to do on stage is their business, but they should at least be honest when it comes to lip-syncing. Maybe I'm wrong. What do you think?