The singer has built much of her career on being an artist who insists on the freedom to speak her mind and express her views on everything, especially politics and social injustice. But she took exception to a cover story by New York Times writer Lynn Hirschberg. So M.I.A. did what any reasonable, professional adult in the entertainment industry would do – she tweeted Hirschberg’s phone number.

“xxx.xxx.xxxx CALL ME IF YOU WANNA TALK TO ME ABOUT THE N Y T TRUTH ISSUE, ill b taking calls all day bitches ;)” the post read.

Dude! That is so not cool. And what makes it worse is the way the tweet was written it appeared that Hirschberg’s number was actually M.I.A.’s number, leading to thousands of phone calls by fans looking to spend some time chatting with the singer.

The piece that M.I.A. got bent out of shape about is a rather unflattering, in-depth interview/expose that’s set to run in this weekend’s Times but is available online now.

In the story, Hirschberg draws attention to the differences between the singer’s public stance and claims about her life and the realities of her situation.

For example, the Sri Lankan-born singer repeatedly proclaimed that her son would be born at home “in a pool of water” because “You gotta embrace the pain, embrace the struggle. And my giving birth is nothing when I think about all the people in Sri Lanka that have to give birth in a concentration camp.”

However, her son with Ben Bronfman (son of Warner Music Group CEO and Seagram’s heir Edgar Bronfman) was born in a private room at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.

Okay, I just want to take a moment to address the fact that I am fully aware that M.I.A. is not the first celebrity with what appears to be a huge disconnect between their public persona/position and their real – and often very pampered – life.

Just look at people like Sting, who is currently involved in trying to prevent the building of a dam on the Amazon River in Brazil that would improve the quality of life for many while adversely impacting some of the country’s indigenous tribes. This despite the fact that, as BBC’s Garry Duffy pointed out last November, the multi-millionaire rock star owns several mansions around the world and jets between them in a private plane.

And don’t even get me started on U2 or Madonna.

The issue here isn’t even the inconsistencies in M.I.A.’s personal narrative that Hirschberg exposes. I defy you to find one celebrity – or even one person you know personally – who hasn’t altered or embellished their life story at some point to make it or themselves more interesting. (Good luck with that.)

What is wrong – totally, absolutely and unarguably wrong – is how the singer responded to the criticism against her. As someone who lives in the public eye and counts on the grace and maturity of thousands of professional people she comes into contact with every year to help her maintain some modicum of privacy, M.I.A. should really know better.

Perhaps an interview conducted with Rolling Stone contributing editor Jenny Eliscu around the same time as Hirschberg’s explains the singer’s juvenile behavior.

“If I wanted to be really political, I’d have to sit down and study you know,” M.I.A. told Rolling Stone’s Eliscu. “But I feel like my approach to politics is [that] I never said I’m smart and I read this and I’m making assumptions. But why aren’t I allowed to write about my experience? Why can’t I say, ‘Oh my God, my school got shot by the government?’ I can’t say that, yet they can do it. But I want to be able to still say it somewhere. There needs to be some sort of an outlet for people like me.”

Sorry, Maya. As long as you keep acting like a petulant fifth-grader, there doesn’t.

Read Lynn Hirschberg’s New York Times story on M.I.A. here.