Skip to comments.
OSCAR FOR 'BREAST' PICTURE
New York Post ^
| 2/05/04
| DON KAPLAN
Posted on 02/05/2004 1:06:51 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:19:26 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
February 5, 2004 -- The Academy Awards have been sucked into Janet Jackson's bare-breast fiasco. ABC has pressured the Academy of Motion Pictures & Sciences to agree to a five-second delay on the Feb. 29 telecast, but the organization is protesting.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: academyawards; broadcaststandards; culturewar; efnfcc; fcc; immaturity; nipplegate; oscars
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
1
posted on
02/05/2004 1:06:51 AM PST
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
Sorry, AMPAS socks-smoking whazoo apertures - broadcasters have to protect their licenses...and like it or not, their licenses restrict your desire for "anything goes" - if that's what you want, put your freakin' celebration of societal denigration on HBO, where they live for "anything goes".
2
posted on
02/05/2004 1:12:36 AM PST
by
Keith in Iowa
(The only good news for Democrats is they could save $$ by switching to Geico.)
To: kattracks
Every year they broadcast without delay and every year Whoopi or Chris Rock or somone abuses the lack or delay.
Act like children, get treated like children.
To: Keith in Iowa
You are one adept at descriptive prose. Love the tag line. I cannot help laughing at the comical whining of the hollywierd elitists.
4
posted on
02/05/2004 1:20:09 AM PST
by
exnavy
To: kattracks
"We don't want that kind of censorship."
Folks like me wouldn't mind a little censorship, thanks in part to Bono, Michael (barf) Moore, Miz. Jackson, Whoopi, et al.
To: kattracks
OK, AMPAS, then all you have to do is move the show to a cable-only network, outside of the regulatory arm of the FCC.
Oh wait, you don't want to do that? The ratings would be too low you say? You mean our public airwaves are still the best way to reach the widest audience, so you want to take advantage of that?
Well, OK then.
6
posted on
02/05/2004 1:51:30 AM PST
by
mcg1969
To: kattracks
The network reportedly approached the Academy about the delay before Sunday's X-rated halftime spectacle I don't approve of the antics during the Superbowl halftime show at all, but calling it "X-rated" is hysterical nonsense. I've seen similar amounts of lewd conduct in a "PG-13" movies...and even more than that in "R" movies, for gosh sakes.
Calling the nonsense that went on during halftime "X-rated" isn't helping anything; it's only making our outrage look silly.
7
posted on
02/05/2004 2:05:17 AM PST
by
Prime Choice
(I'm pro-choice. I just think the "choice" should be made *before* having sex.)
To: Prime Choice
I've seen similar amounts of lewd conduct in a "PG-13" movies... Where you were warned about this conduct.
and even more than that in "R" movies, for gosh sakes.
Did you have your kids with you at the time.
Somehow I can't see the goings on at the half time show being called anything but lewd. It sure wasn't good wholesome family entertainment.
8
posted on
02/05/2004 2:12:38 AM PST
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
That's not my point. My point is that calling said halftime antics "X-Rated" only serves to make our side look ridiculous and detracts from the genuine offensiveness of the MTV-sired "entertainment."
9
posted on
02/05/2004 2:19:35 AM PST
by
Prime Choice
(I'm pro-choice. I just think the "choice" should be made *before* having sex.)
To: Prime Choice
"My point is that calling said halftime antics 'X-Rated' only serves to make our side look ridiculous and detracts from the genuine offensiveness of the MTV - sired 'entertainment'."
So it's the way they worded this fiasco that bothers you? I see your point, but the only people who are going to think that our side is ridiculous are the people who have no problem watching Janet Jackson exposing her breast for the whole world to see. IMHO and as a parent, my last concern or worry does not lie upon those who think that describing this incident as "X Rated" is ridiculous. It's not these people who are raising my child....thank God for that too!
10
posted on
02/05/2004 4:34:12 AM PST
by
Arpege92
To: Arpege92
They are public airwaves and it was indecency, period. X-rated is taking it a bit far but I see the point.
It all started going downhill when NYPD Blue started using the word "shit" in its broadcasts. Since then every program feels it has to go just a tad further. There are guidelines and they need to be followed.
Or as was said in an earlier post, "take it top HBO"
11
posted on
02/05/2004 5:23:08 AM PST
by
EQAndyBuzz
(Gore Lost! Deal with it!!!)
To: kattracks
"We would be very concerned about a delay that would raise the possibility of a network representative deciding that remarks like [director] Michael Moore's last year would be inappropriate," Davis said. "We don't want that kind of censorship."
We, the American people, the ones who own those airwaves, want that kind of censorship. Keep your filth out of our homes.
(Not that I'd watch the hollywood, liberal, incestuous, love fest anyway but it's my airwaves they are polluting. The only significance of the oscars is to see how badly they screw Lord Of The Rings this year (and Passion next year))
12
posted on
02/05/2004 5:36:50 AM PST
by
John O
(God Save America (Please))
To: EQAndyBuzz
"They are public airwaves and it was indecency, period. X-rated is taking it a bit far but I see your point."
I don't think you understood my point. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I'm trying to show you how a parent like myself see's this half time show. I don't allow my son to watch movies that have any nudity in it, period. This Super bowl half time show comes along, and decides for themselves what my son needs to see.
I have no problem with the female breasts.....In fact, I own two of them myself. When people like Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake get in front of a national audience with no warning what so ever, and act out what looked to be a rape scene, people are going to get upset. Laugh if you want, but I don't find any humor in a man ripping at a woman's blouse until her breast becomes exposed.
This show was nothing but trash trying to shock the American audience once again. Well, it worked but it also back fired and I hope this sends a strong message to the so called "entertainment community" that their vulgar displays of so called "art" is nothing but trash and I'm not buying into it, nor will I buy a ticket to go and see it. If other people want to go and see it, that's fine with me....I just don't want them to take away my opportunity to not have to see it.
13
posted on
02/05/2004 8:57:11 AM PST
by
Arpege92
To: kattracks
Sources said that if ABC implements a delay, the Oscars would protest the decision Why would they protest?
14
posted on
02/05/2004 8:58:46 AM PST
by
krb
(the statement on the other side of this tagline is false)
To: Old Grumpy
"We don't want that kind of censorship."
Then we should make the oscars a moneymaking bit for the taxpayers and up the fines.
15
posted on
02/05/2004 9:00:04 AM PST
by
CJ Wolf
To: Arpege92
So it's the way they worded this fiasco that bothers you? Annoys me, really. See, I think we have a legitimate gripe here about immoral conduct being passed off as "entertainment"...but I think we're throwing away this rare opportunity for driving the point home by delving into hyped-up terminology.
Think of it: we're reducing our proper outrage to joke status by calling this matter "X-rated." All the Leftists will need to do is pull up a list of PG-13 movies with similar themes in them and say, "Here's a list of movies the 'Halftime Prudes' consider 'x-rated'!" and the derisive laughter won't be far behind.
We've got a legitimate complaint here, so let's skip the hype 'cause it's only going to hurt us in the end.
16
posted on
02/05/2004 9:16:58 AM PST
by
Prime Choice
(I'm pro-choice. I just think the "choice" should be made *before* having sex.)
To: Prime Choice
Besides toneing down the wording, what would you do to settle this matter?
17
posted on
02/05/2004 9:20:41 AM PST
by
Arpege92
To: Arpege92
I agree with you. You want to show this garbage to me, let me know beforehand that it is going to happen so that I can turn the channel to Sponge Bob.
18
posted on
02/05/2004 9:52:25 AM PST
by
EQAndyBuzz
(Gore Lost! Deal with it!!!)
To: Arpege92
Besides toneing down the wording, what would you do to settle this matter? I'm liking what I'm seeing so far. There seems to be a big backlash against the MTV "culture" in play. Just heard over the newsbreak that a high school has just told MTV to buzz off regarding their planned "reality TV" show that was going to be filmed at the school. The NFL is getting heat for their lax handling of the whole mess, and the MTV goons are seeing their influence eroding across the board. It's a good start and we need to keep the heat cranked up.
19
posted on
02/05/2004 10:07:02 AM PST
by
Prime Choice
(I'm pro-choice. I just think the "choice" should be made *before* having sex.)
To: kattracks
Five second delay or 5 year delay, it'll make no dif to me
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson