I know we're living in an all-interactive, 360-degree feedback world, but still can't shake the sense that for MIA to tweet a New York Times journalist's number and suggest her fans call her to rail against an article smacks more than a little of a bully's tactics.
The article, it's true, doesn't exactly smother MIA in lovey-kiss-kisses:
While Hirschberg's research poses some important questions, particularly with regard to MIA's wealth, her politics, and her relationship with her father, it is the 34-year-old singer who does herself a disservice, admitting to being "tone deaf" and "not very musical". Elsewhere, she shows a childish desire for controversy: "'I kind of want to be an outsider,' [MIA] said, eating a truffle-flavored French fry. 'I don't want to make the same music, sing about the same stuff, talk about the same things. If that makes me a terrorist, then I'm a terrorist.'"
Well, no, it doesn't make you a terrorist. Nor does the tweet-bomb. It does make you look petulant, though, and quite disappointingly thin-skinned for someone who claims to desire to be an outsider. Isn't being knocked by the New York Times meant to be what happens to you if you're beyond the mainsteam?