Breton Thief Oriana Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 my mom brought this up this afternoon. she believes, as most senile elderly people do, that this is a sign that the world is going to hell. (Sry mods) of course, i tried to explain that the artist is property and not business person, but she had no listening in it. now id like to ask what you people think: who made this happen, the Record company, the artist, or was it (as the dude who did it stresses) an accident? all your feedback would be appreciated, as well as statements backing it up. I, personally, believe that this is the work of the evil mega-conglomerate empire of the record industry. Janet Jackson's business people wanted this to happen: they can make fat stacks off of a scandal(SP?) like this. just my opinion oh, and may the mods have pity on my soul for this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marxist ßastard Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Drop it already... For the first five hours of the day afterward, this seemed to be the only thing on the mind of the public -- this topic even seemed to sap away all self-awareness, as I often heard the phrase "Once again, CBS sincerely apologizes for any offence that this may have caused... Now let's watch it again in slo-mo." It isn't really news, and neither the tit nor the gigantic conspiracy surrounding it are real. That said, my opinion is that the tit, being legal entittie (Spelling error? Where?) and franchise, is sentient and thus orchestrated the event on its own. Now, given that my take on the incident is indisputable, I suggest that a moderator rename this to "Random Tits of Knowledge" and lock it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 I agree, who really cares. I can find much better in 5 min on the internet. She's ugly, she barely shows anything, and it wasn't even worth one bit of the discussion about it. And I don't object to your comment... it is a sign that the world is going to hell that anyone considers this worth their attention. As for who's fault it is... I say accident. Either that, or it's complete incompetence... if it was intentional, why stop there? I mean, if you're going for shock potential, this is minor compared to what they could have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hundinman Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 All very good points. When I saw the........... tit............ I was thoroughly disgusted. I am not immature or any thing but come on! It's a superbowl with half the world watching and no one wants to see Janet Jackson topless (half topless at least) I was watching an American news channel and at the news flicker at the bottom of the screen were the words: "America recovers from the single visible breast at super bowl." Well, just my 2 cents. HM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Corbett Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 That... and... she wore a REALLY wierd nipple ring! (I bet those things are painful.) :P Aside from that, you won't be finding much debate now: she confessed to planning a disrobing, but I don't think she expected... umm... this. The NFL is pissed at MTV now. They need to realize that not everyone thinks in the same definitions that they do. IE a lot of married people watch the superbowl, people with young children, et cetera. I hope to see a linebacker charge in their headquarters. That would show them. However, now that we know who did it, there isn't much need for a debate, is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hundinman Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 good point. the debate is good though, just to see what people think and all. the nipple ring was sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iluventi Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 All very good points. When I saw the........... tit............ I was thoroughly disgusted. I am not immature or any thing but come on! It's a superbowl with half the world watching and no one wants to see Janet Jackson topless (half topless at least) I was watching an American news channel and at the news flicker at the bottom of the screen were the words: "America recovers from the single visible breast at super bowl." Well, just my 2 cents. HM Seeing as this is going to be closed... I'd just like to mention... Try not half the world... Try 90% of Americans, and another 10% of the worlds Population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 I reckon 10% is overgenerous there Iluventi. Somehow one cannot imagine Europeans being shocked at the sight of a bare breast whether enhanced, ornamented or inflated. As for the thought of kids being bothered by it either - I feel that such Victorian values are long gone here. With so much freely visible in newsagents, on advertising and with women breast-feeding in public one exposed breast wouldn't get a mention. At present freedom of expression does not extend below the waist-line in the UK but it's probably only a matter of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 I agree, only Americans could react as insanely as this. The Europeans have the right idea, but our conservatives would die before they let that happen here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaiv Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Ansering the topic question: Jackson, Timberlake, and MTV. I'm in America, and everyone is spazzing about it. It's not that big of a deal, really- it wasn't even on the screen for 2 seconds; she also had something covering her nipple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.