I saw more of it from the replays and pictures in the news than when it happened live - it occurred so quickly I thought "did I just see that"? I assumed it was either an accident or that she must have had a see through bodysuit on, until I saw the pics..

But I think the FCC chairman needs to get a grip. I've never viewed the SuperBowl as a "family" event. Personally I was never interested in football until I was in HS, but any young boys watching the game has already seen more "sexually suggestive" moves from cheerleaders (or sideline dancers), or just regular videos and television shows. It really wasn't that deep to me.

Re: Re: Apples and oranges
 

I think you missed Soror Lady Greek's ENTIRE point. She said when you watched the type of things you mentioned..or went to her concerts..YOU KNEW what you were getting into. Watching the SUper Bowl...on a SUnday...at 6pm...it is not fair to expect to see nudity.... Maybe you raise your kids where nudity is ok to be viewed around age 7 or 8..but many folks dont. And many of the instances you are mentioning were either on cable, in a concert, or not on in primetime...

So much filth is thrown around these days..that everything is dumbed down...oh its ok..its just a BREAST!! oh its ok..its just 2 women kissing! OUr kids will see it anyway..:rolleyes:

Re: Re: Apples and oranges
 

Maybe you are missing my point. This was not a Janet Jackson concert, which again like Purple Rain, folx know what they are getting when they choose to attend the concert. This was a the Super Bowl, a football, that had Janet as part of the half-time entertainment like a band would entertain. You would not expect the cheerleaders or band members to expose their breasts or other inappropriate body parts.

So my point is, this is touted as a family activity and what happened was clearly not suitable for family entertainment. Yes, I feel parents should be angry that this happened--especially those parents who do monitor what their children watch on TV or which movies they attend.

By the way, they did not show the guy streaking on TV so I am sure that is why it did has not gotten as much play. But he has been arrested. And yes parents at the game with their children should be just as upset about that, although from what I understand he did not fully expose any sexual body parts because he had on a thong.

And no, I haven't been to any of Janet's concerts and if I had kids younger than 16, I would not allow them to attend either. But just chalk it up to my old fogieness.

Re: Re: Re: Apples and oranges
 

Thank you, Soror.

I didn't know the Superbowl is touted as a "family event" myself. Partially because I don't like football or ever watch it, but mostly because I only know of sports bars/restaurants that have "Big Game Day" celebrations.

Anyway, I still think its stupid to spend money on an investigation of this "incident". If Mr. Powell wants to "clean up" standard TV (i.e ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.) it goes WAYYYYY DEEPER than the 2 to 3 seconds of Janet's boob.

Ok, so we fine CBS and their affiliates, then what? How does that affect the countless other shows on TV (again, I am only speaking of standard TV) that "offend" people. As someone said, the fiflth is EVERYWHERE, not just during a halftime show at the Superbowl.

I hear you..but "2-3 seconds of Janet's boob" is as good a place as any to start. Saying that filth is everywhere is not a good reason to not do anything about it. There are a lot of things on TV that offend people...but they normally come on after 9pm. Whether people consider the Superbowl a family event or not...it was still on CBS during dinner time in many time zones. I guess if you think unexpected partial nudity is ok..then of course you wouldn't see why some people were a little perturbed..but that's what we have a rating system for. Many parents regulate what their children see and the Superbowl halftime show took their rights away as parents to do that. Soror Ladygreek said that maybe she's an old fogie for feeling this way...but I dont think so... I think you are just actually trying to "raise" children the way you see fit...and not let the media do it.

People complain and say parents aren't doing enough when it comes to the images on TV and in radio etc...but then when they do complain...folks say "oh get over it..its just 2-3 seconds of a boob."

On the ensuing outrage-

Although people would have been upset, would it have been different if it had been her top came down because a strap broke or something more accidental than Justin's hand? Sh*t happens sometimes with costumes (I have seen it happen in step shows where you KNOW it was not intentional) so would that be more forgivable than this?

On the topic of the family nature of football- I think the FCC's outrage is somewhat warranted and somewhat hypocritical. Some of the most sexually charged commercials are the ones only shown during football games. I'm bout sick of the "Twins" and while obviously a bare breast is the next level, it is not as though these games are normally taking place with nice clean ads either. While I can understand the shock over it, I think a lot of the most vocal critics (the network, FCC, etc.) are a bunch of big fat hypocrites.

You're right.

I don't think Janet's boob is the best place to start nor will it have any impact on other TV shows. Have you seen daytime television lately? And not to mention, as Kimmie said, the commercials that come on at ALL times of the day. This type of programming is no longer limited to after 9pm. It starts earlier.

You know...I've been thinking about this mess and am realizing that this crap has been blown WAY out of proportion.

OK...did the FCC start suing the news media when they were showing people jumping out of buildings and falling to their deaths on 9-11?

My kids had a WHOLE LOT MORE questions about people jumping to their deaths than they did about Janet Jackson's tittie. Heck, they've seen mine before..WTF is really the big deal here.

There's a bigger issue here - and that's what needs to be focused on.

Now THAT was disturbing. I could not believe that they were showing that on daytime television. Also, the pics of the DEAD Hussien boys. SMH

Is it just me or are people basically crucifying her for her part in it but not mentioning Timberlake too much? I have read a couple of message boards now that are full of censure for her, but don't say too much about him.

Hmm...

I was watching Good Morning America before I left for work and the guest commentator basically said that Justin is too popular with "everyone" which is why he is not getting the backlash. Mothers, grandmothers and children love him, so he's o.k. Janet on the other hand....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You do the math...

And why is there no collateral outrage about ol' greasy Kid Rock :rolleyes: wearing the American flag? You would think that some parts of flyover America would be angrier about that.

I know some ppl that were definitely more concerned about the flag

Now that I know the lace was a separate piece, it probably was an accident. If the FCC is that upset, fine them and let it go. The noise is making more people look for the pictures. Funny though, if it were Europe noone'd give the event a second thought. I'm getting tired of hearing about it. And now CBS is trying to bar them from the Grammies:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I am not surprised at all by the responses here...now Janet's the victim and the FCC is the bully for trying to say something about it...or when folks know they don't make sense they resort to saying...well what about kid rock..well what about daytime television...well what about the commercials..as if this minimizes what happened.

Its so sad because I dont think we see that this mentality is as much a part of the problem as the actions of the media moguls. **SMH**