Winner or Loser? The 2004 Superbowl Halftime Show

[coyotepondering]

On TechTV last night they had a story bit about Tivo tracking showing that Janet Jackson's tit was the most rewatched moment ever.

*shrug*

I guess I'm either desensitized or just don't think a bare hanging tit is inherently arousing. But I guess some of the objection didn't come from it being arousing but inappropriate. No one's ever been able to explain to me why its so horrible but....

*2nd shrug*

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The saying no puvblicity is bad publicity has been a holwood Maxium for years. Janet has a new Album coming out. to be honest I had forgotten Janet Jackson existed. She is in the spotlight now and it can't hurt her record sales.

I didn't watch the halftime show, in fact I hit mute and went back to my book for it. Like many less than even casual fans I watch the game for the commercials. Had it not been for that boobage stunt I wouldn't have been able to tell you who was in the halftime show, I still don't have any clue who the guy was, but I am pop culture challenged.

People are outraged, but by and large I haven't seen all that much outrage that a boob made it onto regular TV. I have seen more outrage that J.J and her co performer obviously planned this, in a deliberate, crass and classless attempt at self promotion. That kind of behavior is fine for the golden globes, or the emmy's or what have you, that's performers gathered together and you expect the attempts at one upsman ship.

The Superbowl, despite the NFL's over the top halftime extraveganzas is about two teams of people who have grinded out a shot at the championship of their sport. It's their shining moment, their 60 minutes in the spotlight with a nation watching. I see more outrage among sorts fans, that a pair of twits, invited to perfor before millions on TV can't be thankful for that opportunity and exposure, but have to do something that upstages the atheletes.

No one was talking about the game the day after, even though it was one of the closest in a long time and was a very good game by all accounts. Everyone was talking baout twit and tit. Thats a real shame and a real disservice to the men who worked so hard to get to the pinacle of thier sport.

Parents angry about their children seeing it also have a valid argument. To you, or me or most people here, it's a tit, big deal. To a parent who is careful to montior what their kids watch and is worried about the permissiveness of the times, it's a slap in the face to have something as "safe" as a sporting event become a meiliu for someone to do that.

It was crass, classless, tasteless and the very worst sort of self-promotion on the part of two people who should have just been thankful they had been given an opportunity for worldwide exposure. Opportunity neither would have been able to generate on the merits of their performing skills.

-Colly

 

[shereads]

Parents angry about their children seeing it also have a valid argument. To you, or me or most people here, it's a tit, big deal. To a parent who is careful to montior what their kids watch and is worried about the permissiveness of the times, it's a slap in the face to have something as "safe" as a sporting event become a meiliu for someone to do that.

Parents should ask themselves why they think that a naked female breast was the crass, tasteless part of the evening.

The pre-game show made me cringe with embarrassment. I wish the FCC chairman felt outraged by the use of dead astronauts in a moment of shameless hucksterism. Did NASA help fund this thing, btw?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Parents should ask themselves why they think that a naked female breast was the crass, tasteless part of the evening.

The pre-game show made me cringe with embarrassment. I wish the FCC chairman felt outraged by the use of dead astronauts in a moment of shameless hucksterism. Did NASA help fund this thing, btw?

I didn't watch the pregame, no commericals

I don't think the female breast was the crass and tasteless issue, I think the vainglorious self promotion was. But that's just me. I kinda like breasts

-Colly

 

[shereads]

I didn't watch the pregame, no commericals

I don't think the female breast was the crass and tasteless issue, I think the vainglorious self promotion was. But that's just me. I kinda like breasts

-Colly

Okay, then. Parents should ask themselves why they think the naked female breast was the only evidence of vainglorious self promotion.

You didn't watch the commercials? That's the only reason I watch. Disappointing crop this year, though.

 

[McKenna]

.

 

[coyotepondering]

Exactly. It's almost a slap in the face to every woman in the world. I mean, good God, they actually HAVE those nasty little (big?) beasts on their person. We should shun them, make them cover them up, the nasty sinners.

It's Eve-syndrome all over again.

Oy.

That shouldn't surprise you. Fear of women and sexuality is pretty prevalent in our culture. I was helpling a friend with research on sexual themes in greek and roman myth and nearly got buried in the fear of women.

I think it was Freud who theorized that it was a male fear of the implicit connection a mother was able to form during breast feeding that led to a need to make sure women were covered.

Me? I just think our species is stupid.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Okay, then. Parents should ask themselves why they think the naked female breast was the only evidence of vainglorious self promotion.

You didn't watch the commercials? That's the only reason I watch. Disappointing crop this year, though.

I dunno Sher. The bear commiting identy theft for a case of pepsi was pretty cute and the lil donkey who wanted to be a clydsedale was also cute

The Hyndrix commercial was also pretty funny. Can you imagine Excuse me while I kiss the sky as a polka?

-Colly

 

[shereads]

I can imagine almost any song as a polka, if I picture John Candy and the Schmenge Brothers.

My criterion for a great Superbowl commercial is that it spawns a catchphrase. Was there a potential 'whazzup?' in the bunch? I can't recall one.

My other criterion is that I can't stop laughing, which was most recently true a few years ago when the pets.com handpuppet sang, "If You Leave Me Now" off key, and finished by threatening to throw up in his master's car.

EDITED to add: Superbowl commercial that made me cry:

The debut commercial for the job hunt site, monster.com, that featured kids talking about their career aspirations: "I want to work my way up to middle management," "I want to be a yes-man," "I want to be paid less than a man for the same job," etc. At the end the screen went black and this line came up in white type:

What did you want to be?

I was at an all-time career low and I bawled like a baby when I saw that.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I can imagine almost any song as a polka, if I picture John Candy and the Schmenge Brothers.

My criterion for a great Superbowl commercial is that it spawns a catchphrase. Was there a potential 'whazzup?' in the bunch? I can't recall one.

My other criterion is that I can't stop laughing, which was most recently true a few years ago when the pets.com handpuppet sang, "If You Leave Me Now" off key, and finished by threatening to throw up in his master's car.

I still think the classic Mean Joe green Coke commercial is the gold standard of superbowl commercials.

-Colly

 

[MR. Gibson]

janet jackson happens to be my favorite female singer and i did not mind what she and justin did. I was surprised sure but it did not bother me so much. I think justin wanted to get back at former girlfriend britney spears by topping her kiss to maddonna with a stunt like this. and heres the bottom line. If people did not like the janet jackson justin timberlake raunchy dance- turn off the damn tv set then. and if the news did not like it- why so much publicity and pictures? don't run any hot pics then. stars like michael jackson,maddonna,britney spears,janet and justin attract attention and everybody wants to here all the dirt about them. and a stunt like this will do wonders for janet and justins next music sales and a halftime tape of this will sell out immedietly. I already taped the superbowl though and I watch it all the time. nuff said!!!

My sexy tales!

 

[Guest]

nuff said!!!

Yes, please.

Perdita

 

[Guest]

 

[MR. Gibson]

plus the FBI has enough problems on their hands trying to track terrorrism now they want to investigate janet jacksons chest? please!!!

 

[Colleen Thomas]

plus the FBI has enough problems on their hands trying to track terrorrism now they want to investigate janet jacksons chest? please!!!

You miss the point Gibson. Brit and Madonna kissing, while controversial isn't illegal. Nudity on the pblic airwaves is. And both Janet and Justin(?) are very aware of that. Like so many celebrities they seem to feel they are above the laws that govern what little people like you and I can do.

Is nudity on the public airwaves being so regulated silly? Most likely. I don't have any kids, if I did they wouldn't be allowed to watch TV anyway. Not because I would be afraid of them seeing janet's boob or anyone elses for that matter, but I wouldn't want to expose them to the intellect annihilating drivel that passes for entertainment now days.

That said it is offensive to some and there are people with young kids who do try to protect them from growing up too fast. The FCC regs are there so a parent can be pretty sure that their kids won't see it. Both Janet and the fellow both know that and neither one gave a flying fuck about it. Or about the rules. Or about anything else, but making sure they were the talk of the town the next day.

-Colly

 

[Guest]

Interview with a tit:

King Kaufman's Sports Daily (Salon.com) - Exclusive: Janet Jackson's breast speaks!

Feb. 3, 2004 | Janet Jackson's right breast, exposed during the Super Bowl halftime show Sunday by Justin Timberlake, is the talk of the entertainment world. Timberlake was performing an erotically charged number with Jackson when he reached over after singing the lyric "I'll get you naked by the end of this song" and pulled a part of her costume off, exposing her breast, which was adorned with a sunburst-shaped piercing.
. . .
Now, in an exclusive interview, Jackson's breast speaks for the first time about her Super Bowl appearance and the controversy that's followed. Salon reached the breast on her cellphone.

Have you been surprised by the reaction to your international TV debut?

Honestly, I have. I really don't see what the big deal is. I mean, you watched the Super Bowl. Every other commercial was for a pill to help guys get erections, am I right? Well, we were just going a more natural route, keeping it organic. Janet's very into the organic.

So are you saying that Justin ripping Janet's costume and exposing you was a planned event?

Um -- [whispering away from the phone] -- um, I don't want to say that it was planned, no.

So you're saying it wasn't planned?

I think it's better to just say it happened. What happens happens, and you have to look inside your own spirituality to determine the reality of the realism of things, and whether there's a plan or not is determined by forces we can't know about and feelings we can't be sure we have, so we just have to be in tune, be open, let it flow.

I have no idea what you're talking about and even less interest, and yet I find myself riveted by you.

Yeah. It's a thing I have.

(...)

Uh, hello?

Hi! Sorry. OK. So what I mean is, it looked planned. I've seen some female breasts get accidentally exposed in my time, the odd tube top playfully pulled down, the décolletage becoming disorganized, that sort of thing, and the reaction is always the same: The woman jerks her arms crossed at the chest as she hunches over slightly and lets out a wide-eyed "Oh!" That wasn't Janet's reaction.

Janet's a seasoned performer. She knows how to handle things gracefully.

Yeah, but her reaction was to assume a posture and expression suspiciously close to the heavy-lidded, semi-pained look she uses to simulate being sexually turned on in her videos and photos.

Maybe she was just going with it, staying in the moment.

The way Justin snatched at the costume, it seemed more violent than sexual.

Sometimes a little mild, mutually consensual, I'll call it roughness, not violence, can be a way for the sexual intertwining of sensualist feelings to get intermingled with the needs and wants of whatever it is you're trying to be on this earth. Janet and I learned a lot about that from our yoga instructor.

Yeah. There it is again. Strangely fascinating. Anyway, Justin also didn't act surprised, or embarrassed, or nonplused, or any of the other reactions one might have after accidentally stripping a woman on TV. He just kept that blank look that he always has.

That blank look, that is Justin.

The talk is that Janet needed a career boost, and Matt Drudge is reporting exclusively, for what that's worth, that CBS executives signed off on your appearance. How cheesy of him to use the self-aggrandizing word "exclusive."

Well, I don't know anything about CBS executives, but I can tell you that I don't need them signing off on anything I do. I mean, check it out, me and my kind pretty much run the world. CBS executives worship me! Everyone does. I make one split-second appearance in a long shot and I'm the toast of the international media.

And besides, those CBS executives aren't real fond of controversy. They're the ones who wouldn't allow an anti-George W. Bush ad on the Super Bowl telecast.

George W.'s my man. Like I said: Me and my kind run the world. But honey, Janet doesn't need a career boost. She's a huge star, as symbolized by the piercing of the sun she wears on me.

Even big stars need a boost now and then. Singing "Rhythm Nation" didn't exactly make her seem current and hot. Justin's fans were probably thinking, "Is that, like, his old choir teacher or something?"

Now you're just bringing negativity into the world, and I really don't want to deal with the negative vibrations right now. Why don't you go interview Nelly's crotch if you want to stir up some controversy. This is a big day for me and I'm trying to keep the energy smooth. I've got six more exclusive interviews, then Letterman tonight, Howard Stern in the morning. It's just unreal.

Hey, speaking of unreal, that reminds me of one more thing I wanted to ask you ...

[Click.]

 

[MR. Gibson]

your right colly. you are a bright girl and have put me in my place but you have to admit janet and justin did what they set out to do and now they have everybody talking about them. even bright people like you!

 

[shereads]

You miss the point Gibson. Brit and Madonna kissing, while controversial isn't illegal. Nudity on the pblic airwaves is.

Not true, Colly. NBC had a cop show (not NYPD Blue, but the one that starred Jimmy Smits for a while - yum - and before that, the red-haired guy from CSI) and that show was famous for showing butt-shots of their stars showering.

I remember, because when Jimmy Smits came on the show, I started watching faithfully in case they showed his ass. Instead, I got a shower scene with the character actor who played "Detective Sipowitz" and who was the, um, meat of the show, so to speak.

It was a great TV moment, but not because his ass was great. Cranky Sipowitz was in the shower when his girlfriend joined him - He was ultraconservative and not happy to be showering with his girlfriend - and after the butt shot, we got a shot of his face as he said, "Um, I usually wash that myself..."

Moments later, "Wow. That's gonna be really clean."



If NBC can put asses on the public airwaves, why can't there be a breast on the SuperBowl? I suppose it's because it was a "family" sports event, in which case the exposed breast was still the least sleazy thing about the pre-game and half-time shows.

But no way was it illegal.

 

[shereads]

So...If it's not illegal (the cops' asses as precedent), then what is the big deal about the breast that makes it worth an FCC investigation?

It's that parents were shocked and offended? And that CBS wasn't warned in advance?

Are these offended parents and this apologetic network the same ones who were letting their kids watch Justin and Janet perform a dance to a song whose most memorable lyric is, "I'm gonna get you naked before the end of this song?"

I don't get it. I do, but the hypocrisy of it amazes me.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

So...If it's not illegal (the cops' asses as precedent), then what is the big deal about the breast that makes it worth an FCC investigation?

It's that parents were shocked and offended? And that CBS wasn't warned in advance?

Are these offended parents and this apologetic network the same ones who were letting their kids watch Justin and Janet perform a dance to a song whose most memorable lyric is, "I'm gonna get you naked before the end of this song?"

I don't get it. I do, but the hypocrisy of it amazes me.

I don't watch tv. The last show I remember watching with any regularity was the wonderful world of disney on sunday nights. I had always been told that it was against the law to show nudity, times have apparently passed me by. Oh well

-Colly

 

[MR. Gibson]

just curious miss thomas since you don't watch tv what do you like to do? do you go to any movies? I know you are probably not a quaker or anything. I mean I have many other interests besides tv but what do you like to do in place of it? just curious. you can tell me to buzz of if ya like!

 

[lucky-E-leven]

So...If it's not illegal (the cops' asses as precedent), then what is the big deal about the breast that makes it worth an FCC investigation?

It's that parents were shocked and offended? And that CBS wasn't warned in advance?

Are these offended parents and this apologetic network the same ones who were letting their kids watch Justin and Janet perform a dance to a song whose most memorable lyric is, "I'm gonna get you naked before the end of this song?"

I don't get it. I do, but the hypocrisy of it amazes me.

Let me just start by saying I think the whole thing is ridiculous. I personally think that the airing of most of Sept. 11 was a helluva lot more traumatic to a child's eyes than a woman's breast. However, according to the FCC it is fine as it is accepted by the community.

I found this on their website concerning indecency and thought it might clear up the 'ass on late night television' vs. 'the tit on primetime television'.

For example, the Courts have said that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be banned entirely. It may be restricted, however, in order to avoid its broadcast when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. Between 6 am and 10 pm - when there is the greatest likelihood that children may be watching - indecent material is prohibited by FCC rules. Broadcasters are required to schedule their programming accordingly.

The Courts have said that obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. To be considered obscene, material must meet a 3-prong test:

1. An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient (arousing lustful feelings) interest;

2. The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and

3. The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Indecency is defined as language or material that, in context, describes or depicts, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community broadcast standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities. Indecent programming contains patently offensive sexual or excretory references that do not rise to the level of obscenity. As such, the courts have held that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be banned entirely. It may, however, be restricted in order to avoid its broadcast during times of the day when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. As such, broadcasts -- both on television and radio -- that fit within the indecency definition and that are aired between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. are subject to indecency enforcement action.
---

These are not my rules, and I personally was extremely offended by Sipowitz's ass on the tele, but apparently it was shown outside of the 'kiddie time' or it is not "patently offensive as measured by contemporary community broadcast standards for the broadcast medium."

-E

wondering why t & a is so offensive...and to the end of britney and madonna kissing on a primetime family special awards show, I think it would be a little more difficult for ultra conservative families to explain away two women kissing than it would be a tit falling out, but what do I know?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

just curious miss thomas since you don't watch tv what do you like to do? do you go to any movies? I know you are probably not a quaker or anything. I mean I have many other interests besides tv but what do you like to do in place of it? just curious. you can tell me to buzz of if ya like!

I read a great deal and write. On rare occasion i will watch a move or dvd and on rarer still occasions I watch something on the history channel, TCL or court TV, if something catches my interest.

In general I find network television to be insulting to my intelligence at best, complete drivel at worst. I can almost always find something better to do with my time and if not, well there's always rearrangeing my lingerie chest

-Colly

 

[shereads]

Re: Interview with a tit:

King Kaufman's Sports Daily (Salon.com) - Exclusive: Janet Jackson's breast speaks!

Thank you, Perdita.

 

[McKenna]

.