Pam & Tommy, the drama miniseries released in February 2022, tells the true story of Pamela Anderson and Tommy Lee’s sex tape, which was stolen by a disgruntled contractor from their home and sold to the public. The original eight-part limited series showed how the exploitation of the tape unraveled, and the subsequent effects on the couple, porn culture, and mainstream media.
Hulu says the show “explores the intersection of privacy, technology, and celebrity,” tracing the origins of today’s celebrity culture to “a stolen tape seen by millions but meant to have an audience of just two.” The wording is ironic and almost hypocritical as Hulu essentially contributes to the buzz about the tape, reviving the controversy from the late 1990’s for an entirely new generation.
The promotions for the miniseries were covered in taglines about female empowerment, but its release raised the question of whether the show itself is yet another form of exploitation. According to ET, Pamela Anderson herself disapproved of the series. The show’s creators sought to inspire sympathy for the two stars, particularly Anderson, in scenes that highlight the misogyny she faced both before and after the tape’s rise in fame. However, she and her body were forced back into the spotlight against her wishes. Regardless of the message the show attempts to convey, is this yet another violation of the star’s privacy in the name of entertainment and profit?
The first few episodes of the show are entertaining enough, with a funky 90’s soundtrack, colorful scenes, and captivating cinematic techniques. The show first follows shabby Rand Gauthier, former porn star and Tommy Lee’s contractor, a.k.a. the sex-tape stealer. The narrative then shifts to follow the beginning of Pam and Tommy’s wild relationship. The two storylines clash considerably on screen, setting up the inevitable conflict between the two parties. The couple’s realization that their tape has been stolen marks a tonal shift in the show. This is where the series begins to highlight the misogyny that Anderson faced in the wake of the turmoil.
At one point in the show, Lee quips “I’m on that tape, same as you,” to which Anderson responds, “Not like me, you’re not.” The show starkly contrasts Pam and Tommy’s experiences; Lee was celebrated for his “conquest,” and his apparently massive…appendage. At the same time, Anderson was shamed and called all sorts of derogatory terms.
Multiple scenes feature Anderson in rooms full of men who either diminish her opinions because of her femininity or utilize her femininity to demean her. During a grueling deposition, the defense lawyer insinuates the personal tape she made with her husband is in the same vein as her risqué photo shoots and acting career. The lawyer, much like Gauthier and the many other men who have exploited her, believe that because she had exposed herself before, the rights to her bodily autonomy and consent are lessened.
Even though Anderson had consented and benefited from photoshoots with little to no clothes, she deserves the same privacy and autonomy over her body as anyone else. The series appears to communicate this message clearly, but is this statement enough to justify going against the real Anderson’s wishes?
By pointing out the exploitation of Pam and Tommy, the show essentially identifies its own hypocrisy. In telling the story of the infamous sex tape, a moment in Anderson’s life that she finds incredibly painful, the show exploits her yet again. Moments of the sex tape are closely recreated. By having audiences watch actors play these scenes, it forces the real tape back into the spotlight, highlighting the uncomfortable similarities of exploitation the show tried to emphasize.
This discussion raises the debate of whether any form of biographical media is not exploitative. Hollywood first and foremost prioritizes profit. Regardless of whatever profound message is slapped on the exterior, we all know that the purpose of making media is to make money, which overshadows Pam & Tommy’s facade of women’s empowerment. The themes of publicity and privacy shine through once the hypocrisy is pointed out.
Is any form of media about this scandal ethical? Is the original Rolling Stone article ethical? Is this article ethical? Well, that’s up to the consumer to decide. Any conversation about morality is subjective. The one thing we can all agree on is that once something is put on the internet, it will be there forever. Pamela Anderson knows this reality best.