Damage Control, MTV Style (MTV takes "incriminating" stories off their web site)

Ramblings' Journal | 2.2.04 | Michael King

[mhking]

MTV tries it's hand at damage control, but fails miserably

MTV has rather deftly changed it's text on it's Super Bowl page from the text originally up there (and touted by news programs and websites everywhere:

Janet Jackson Got Nasty at the MTV-Produced Super Bowl Halftime Show

Jaws across the country hit the carpet at exactly the same time. You know what we're talking about...Janet Jackson, Justin Timberlake and a kinky finale that rocked the Super Bowl to its core. P. Diddy, Kid Rock, & Nelly rounded out the halftime show in the midst of the greatest game on earth. MTV was Super Bowl central, so armchair quarterbacks, fair weather fanatics and fans of Janet Jackson and her pasties were definitely in the right place. So strap on those pads, keep your head down and get the full recap of The AOL Super Bowl XXXVIII Halftime Show produced by MTV.

They've replaced the text with the more pedestrian and contrite:

The tearing of Janet Jackson's costume was unrehearsed, unplanned, completely unintentional and was inconsistent with assurances we had about the content of the performance. MTV regrets this incident occurred and we apologize to anyone who was offended by it.

They've also removed the initial press release from their site (the one that touted Janet's "shocking moments"). Of course, anyone who knows how to use Google can find it in their cache.

FCC Chairman Michael Powell is understandably outraged, and has demanded an investigation into the incident.

I can't figure out who would be fined though. All the CBS stations? Of course not - none of them knew what was coming. The CBS O&O's? I'm sure the same thing applies there. Network brass? Possibly. I'm sure they knew what was coming. MTV? Works for me. Janet and Justin? Also makes sense. If I were a local official in Houston, you can bet I'd look seriously into whether any local obscenity ordinances were violated by the pair.

After all, once the smoke clears, Janet, I'm sure, will be happy with the free exposure (pun not intended) for her new CD, due to come out the end of March.

Producer Dallas Austin was quoted recently as saying about Janet's new album:

"To me, this is her Dirty Mind," Austin explained, referring to the Prince album that established him as a hormonally charged pop star. "It's a really sexy record, but not in a sensual way. It's bold, it's fun, it's really positive. Nobody's sad, nobody's mad. It's just really fun songs where she happens to be talking frankly about sex."

I'm sure Clear Channel is happy - they're the most likely candidate to replace MTV as producer of the halftime show for next year's Super Bowl in Jacksonville.

[mhking]

I know. I mention the removal of the release in the article above. I also link to the Google cache.

[Weimdog]

Sorry didn't see that.

[weegee]

I don't believe this was an "accident" any more than I believe that Rock The Vote is a non-partisan organization.

[weegee]

Wise decision. While MTV has indicated that they will no longer show some of the older Real World series, they are now in syndication on commercial television (I don't think that any of those participants get a dime of that money).

Certainly the exploitation that MTV-Viacom is doing of young America is no different than the contracts seen by "fresh meat" in the music industry.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Funny thing is, for all the hundreds of millions that OTHER advertisers paid for THEIR SuperBowl advertising ...

NOBODY, anywhere, in any market is talking about the other commercials.

No other advertiser got their money's worth because of this little MTV stunt.

And no advertiser that paid up for time during half-time got their audience - since the rest of the half-time show was SO bad many quit, changed channels, or left for a while!

THAT little fact is going to hurt CBS and the NFL more than any complaints now.

But we need to complain to the NFL anyway .... and complain the OTHER advertisers as well.

Why should THEY pay for trash that offends anyone with morals higher than a breast-grabbing monkey?

[mhking]

And no advertiser that paid up for time during half-time got their audience - since the rest of the half-time show was SO bad many quit, changed channels, or left for a while!

Quiet as it's kept, I'm sure the NFL would have distanced themselves from the halftime show, even if Janet hadn't bared her breast. Most people were so disgusted with the half-assed scattergun approach that MTV took with the show that (as you pointed out) many tuned out entirely.

I'm actually wondering what kind of response AOL has had, as "major sponsor" of the halftime fiasco.

[theDentist]

Wake up dipstick. The NFL just got one of the highest rated games in history, and now they know that NEXT YEAR everyone will be watching to see how this can be topped. And they have the Pro Bowl next Sunday. Once again, more viewers, which translates to more money.

Publicly they frown, but behind closed doors they are ecstatic! Even "bad" press is good press. They may lose some viewers, but they'll gain more.

[Howlin]

Here it is.

[dennisw]

Janet Jackson is skanky in this half time photo. For sure the kiddies are still in a state of shock-->

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040202/i/r2794264459.jpg

[NYCVirago]

And she's only 37 years old. She makes Madonna look well-preserved!

[antiRepublicrat]

The tearing of Janet Jackson's costume was unrehearsed, unplanned, completely unintentional and was inconsistent with assurances we had about the content of the performance.

Does anyone actually believe that horsesh** story? I have no problem with "adult content" in restricted settings (where parents can control) but don't put it on the Superbowl where millions of kids are watching! I stopped watching MTV years ago, and now I know I'll never start again.

[mhking]

I have no problem with "adult content" in restricted settings (where parents can control) but don't put it on the Superbowl where millions of kids are watching!

Exactly.

I missed it live. My first indication of what happened was my 10 year-old son yelling "He yanked her top off!" at the top of his lungs. I heard him from the bathroom, where I had ensconced myself.

[In_25_words_or_less]

It's clear there are decision makers at MTV with no instinct for limits or boundaries. Remember the "Shower Rangers"?

[In_25_words_or_less]

Publicly they frown, but behind closed doors they are ecstatic! Even "bad" press is good press. They may lose some viewers, but they'll gain more.

It's possible what was done this year might not change unless it somehow winds up costing a lot of them a lot of money.

[theDentist]

Yes, that's pretty true. They should be facing very heavy fines from the FCC, and members of the upper management should be finding themselves out of work. As well as Timberlake and Jackson.

[Sender]

I went to the fridge to get my jug and I missed tit entirely. I figured I had time, a little nip'll make the second half go better. But as soon as I came abreast of the news I felt like a complete boob. I saw the picture later though and I kinda lactate.

[JulieRNR21]

Since you asked about the recation at AOL:
Update from AOL Corporate HQ:

Just got a phone call back from Dottie McCain, a member of an AOL Corporate Committee called 'Escalations'.

A five member committee is investigating the lewd behavior of Jane Jackson & Justin Timberlake at the AOL sponsored Super Bowl half-time show.

Please send your comments to Dottie McCain here:

DCMCCAINJAX@aol.com

Also call this number at AOL HQ between 9-5 pm M-F:

1-703-265-1000

Ask the switchboard operator to connect you with 'Escalations'.
She assured me that a live person on the committee would take the call.

I told her that AOL will suffer serious financial losses unless there are consequences for those responsible. And I am contemplating taking a loss of several thousand dollars in a stock sale.

Emails from Freepers who are AOL members and/or stockholders will be most effective but I urge everyone to email & Call ASAP.

[humboldtconservative]

Wake up dipstick.

Don't call me dipstick. It is unnecessary. Read the first comment. The poster said that the NFl was just upset that it wasn't announced so that they would get the ratings for todays game.

Publicly they frown, but behind closed doors they are ecstatic! Even "bad" press is good press. They may lose some viewers, but they'll gain more.

Keep that protagonistic view of the world. I think the NFL is ticked because all of this overshadows the fact that one of the best Super Bowls in a long time was played yesterday. And, since you aren't a football fan anyway, I could really care less what you think you know. People like you tune in to watch the commercials and halftime. Try watching an entire season, then maybe you'll understand.

[Nick Danger]

all of this over a covered boob is preposterous.

I don't think it's about the boob. I think it's about people being scared. On some visceral level, we all suspect that we're just a bunch of clever savages who have somehow stumbled onto this system for living together in enormous communitites in relative peace.

We're not sure how it works, but we know it has something to do with self-restraint. Many of the things we "don't do" in our society (like baring breasts in public) are totally arbitrary. But they help us get across to children the concept of there being things that "you just don't do" and they also serve as a kind of "Identification Friend or Foe" that is essential as we navigate our way among strangers in our enormous communities.

Someone who accepts the generally-recognized taboos is displaying evidence of having been socialized as a civilized human. It happens, but the guy in a coat and tie who suddenly pulls out a knife and stabs you is a rarity. These little restrictions we place on ourselves may seem stupid and silly, but as a device for communicating "I am capable of self-restraint and I know basic civilized behavior," they save us a lot of time.

Secretary Rumsfeld is almost hilarious in the way he uses 1950's language to swear. His is an extremely sophisticated act, and one thing it shows us is how many of the taboos that used to restrain people's behavior are gone now. When I was a kid, adults of a certain social class did not say 'Damn' or 'Hell' in public. All of that is gone now. We've all seen corporate CEO's spew the f-word in meetings as if it's an everyday word, the way Rumsfeld uses "Oh, goodness gracious no."

When 'Hell' and 'damn' entered the everyday lexicon, the signs were still saying "Savagery 110 miles."

A lot of people saw what happened on TV yesterday -- and it wasn't just Janet and her boob -- as the sign that says "Pavement ends 500 feet."

Is that an over-reaction? I don't think it is. The signs that there is a fundamental "self-restraint" problem out there are all around us. This thing yesterday just happened to hit us over the head with it in a very symbolic way.

Keeping certain, totally arbitrary body parts covered is not being prudish, it is broadcasting to those around you "I am not a danger to you because I know how self-restraint works and I practice it." At one time, not making certain arbitrary mouth-noises was another of those signals. These public displays of self-restraint exist in civilizations because they are useful. When they are all gone, we will not know friend from foe. We will not know who can be trusted, and who can't. Our civilization will be impossible to conduct.

[humboldtconservative]

I've seen the close up. Maybe you need glasses or a diagram of the female body. Last time I checked, nipples weren't SILVER!!