DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Oh! The Horror!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 38, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/03/2004 09:56:14 AM · #1
Let me start by saying that I am not a football fan. I do not play it (maybe on the rare occasion with some friends) and certainly do not watch it on TV. If I'm invited to the local Stadium to see the Alouettes (CFL) I will go, but not because of the game. It's a social thing. I am although a fan of sports. I play many sports and have been around sports most of my life. But enough about me.

I did not see the Super Bowl. Yes, I'm the one.;-) I do not know even who was playing or who won. Therefore I did not see the horror the occured in the half time show.



Oh! The Horror! I only read about it in the paper today. I'm as upset as the executives at CBS. How could they let such a thing happen. Imagine all the frightened little football fans that had to witness such a sight on their BOOB tube.

I hear they are launching an investigation. The man in charge said it would be quick and that they would get to the bottom of this. I for one want to know how this could happen on American TV. As a Canadian, I'm appalled! Such a thing would never happen on our TVs. They should call in the FBI, the CIA, Interpol!

I want to know! We want to know! We all want to know! : Janet...Are they real?

< end sarcasmic tone>

Come on. Get real....Who cares.

Message edited by author 2004-02-03 10:08:01.
 02/03/2004 10:07:14 AM · #2
LOL Mario .... i didnt see any of it either ... instead i was getting "cultured" at a Phantom of the Opera performance :) ... some things are just better missed out on :)
 02/03/2004 10:23:49 AM · #3
No they're not real, she's said that before..and sarcasm aside, when a station agrees to certain standards and actually watch the rehearsals to ensure that standard is met and then the performers completely disregard those ideals for ratings - I'd be super pissed, too. What about the thousands of families trying to, even for a fleeting moment, enjoy an all ages show? She might've covered up for a moment, but she was back to singing and dancing with her armor-piercing-bullet-nipple-cover hanging out. *cough* some accident...*cough*
 02/03/2004 10:44:40 AM · #4
I remember a time when the half-time show at the Super Bowl was corny but fun. Then MTV got involved and it all went downhill from there. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against MTV, heck, used to watch it all the time when it first started, but let's also face the fact that MTV is not the most family oriented channel around. I did not see the actual show, am glad my girls didn't get to see it either though I have shown them the pictures and asked them what they thought of the whole thing. From the mouths of my 11 year old and my 8 year old.

"Justin Timberlake is such a dork, he only got famous because he dated Britney."

"Is that Micheal dressed up as a girl?"

"Ewwwwwwwwwwwww!"

So there you have the words of some of the kids they are trying to appeal to. I'm sorry but it needs to go back to good clean fun and get MTV out of the picture.

The best Superbowl halftimes I remember are the ones where kids from all over the country got to participate and you could see how happy they were to be there.

Deannda
Our favorite commercial was the donkey/Clydesdale commercial!
 02/03/2004 10:47:12 AM · #5
They've already admitted it wasn't an accident.

Although one local radio commentator has pointed out the lack of outrage over the dog holding a man's privates hostage for some beer, or that convincing demonstration of the flammability of equine flatulence.
 02/03/2004 10:49:50 AM · #6
We actually missed the big event, but just as Janet came on, my friend's wife remarked "Oh, the sane one in the family," and I replied with "the supposedly sane one." Sorry, I didn't mean to give them bad ideas ....
 02/03/2004 11:03:34 AM · #7
''The decision to have a costume reveal at the end of my halftime show performance was made after final rehearsals. MTV was completely unaware of it,'' Jackson said. ''It was not my intention that it go as far as it did. I apologize to anyone offended - including the audience, MTV, CBS and the NFL.''

~Janet Jackson~

There was suposed to be another costume underneath that was to be revealed to the world, and that came off with her original costume, revealing something quite different. In some other photos of her, you can actually see the red costume showing from underneath her black one.
It was planned, but not planned THAT way.
 02/03/2004 11:12:40 AM · #8
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
It was planned, but not planned THAT way.

I'm not sure the "original concept" as you describe it would have exactly constituted "good taste" either ... does it matter if he really rips off her clothes or only "pretends" to rip off her clothes? I think the latter is actually the more subversive message, that it's OK and playful and just part of life for men to go around ripping off women's clothes. That's more of a problem that what we saw ... which you can see in any public place in the US a woman decides to feed her baby.

Message edited by author 2004-02-03 11:15:05.
 02/03/2004 11:24:52 AM · #9
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
It was planned, but not planned THAT way.


Then why was she wearing the nipple cover thingy. Come on, that's BS. It was planned all the way. Otherwise, she would have run away crying, like her brother.

Anyway, why is this such a big deal? You can see as much watching most american sitcoms. I'm sure the bulk of the football fans did not give a damn. They certainly weren't offended.

Message edited by author 2004-02-03 11:33:13.
 02/03/2004 11:27:20 AM · #10
An executive from TiVo said that it was the most replayed Superbowl highlight in history.

BTW George Dubya condemned it, even though he admitted that he hadn't seen it (ya right). Sorta like his stance on Weapons of Mass Destruction (I stole that line from Jeff Hutchingson/Canada AM). LOL

Cheers,

Owen
 02/03/2004 11:40:59 AM · #11
Family program my a__ ! The game is filled with violence, the commercials promote alchohol and sexism, there is probably no other sporting event that is connected with as much gambling and everyone is making such a big deal about a little tit (no pun intended). Since when is a woman's body obscene?

02/03/2004 11:44:44 AM · #12
Originally posted by GeneralE:
They've already admitted it wasn't an accident.

Although one local radio commentator has pointed out the lack of outrage over the dog holding a man's privates hostage for some beer, or that convincing demonstration of the flammability of equine flatulence.


The reason for the lack of outrage over the commercials you mentioned are because in the first one, the man deserved to have his privates held hostage, he was holding the other man's beer hostage wasn't he? And to be so rude to that sweet puppy! And the dog's owner did chastise him, he did say, "Bad dog!"

I just watched the second one on the Bud site, ROFLMAO!!!! Any idiot would know better than to put a candle near a horse's hind end, LOL!

Deannda
There is a difference between tasteful humor and crass publicity
 02/03/2004 01:29:28 PM · #13
First off the Super Bowl is a joke.

What really freaks me out is all this fuss over Janet's right breast (A.K.A. Tity Gate). Did anyone hear the lyrics to any of the songs played at half time. Hip Hop in my opinion is more offensive than a breast. BTW. Janet Jackson has an album coming out in March...accident my ass.

But this could be an American attitude problem regarding sex.
Here in Canada they ran a beer commercial with 2 attractive women making out so they can share the first woman's lip gloss. A blatant over the top exploitation of sex to peddle beer. It got some attention in Canadian news, but nothing in comparison with tity gate.

From Bill Cinton's cigar to Brittany Spears and Madonna's kiss all the way back to Janet Jackson the American public is outraged at these immoral acts. But they have no problem bombing IRAQ in the name of WMD, when there was none.

That some how skipped the moral radar.
Where are my freedom fries?
02/03/2004 01:34:31 PM · #14
The rest of world is actually laughing out loud at this silly and very puritan "reaction" to the Super Bowl half-time show. Just travel to other lands and you will see more nudity on TV, on the beach, in the billboards, just about anywhere and everywhere. It is normal folks. It is the human body. Half of the population have breasts, so what's the big deal?

I find it especially funny that Michael Powell (FCC Chair) is leading the charge of condemnation. Think about it, Michael Powell is Colin Powell's son. Colin Powell is the retire US General and one-time leader of the world's most powerful military. Currently he is serving as the Secretary of State.

Is Michael Powell's own father not someone who has directly or indirectly caused an excessive loss of human life, has he not broken economies, redirected and shifted political agendas, deposed leaders, and generally turned the world upside down to serve his own leaders? Is Michael Powell not a lawyer!!! Need I saw more?

Are not these activities more of a concern then Janet's breast? They should be.

When I lived in Tokyo as a student, I thought the openness towards nudity was terrific - what 19 year wouldn't? And, then as I traveled to places like Brazil, Greece, France, Spain, and to most of the islands in the Caribbean, I thought that it was somewhat normal to see nudity.

I might add, that a lot of the nudity that I have viewed should not have been shown in the first place - they don't all have Janet Jackson's fine form. And, fifty year old, 60 pound overweight men should not be wearing a Speedo bathing suit. Enough said.

All in all, is it not rather ridiculous to consider this momentary (or should I say, monetary) and irrelevant event to be worthy of news reporting? My, my, my, what have we all become?
 02/03/2004 01:51:04 PM · #15
Steven Tyler singing the US national anthem at the Indy 500 a couple of years back was far worse than this.

What amazes me is that the US is the homeland of porn movies, porn sites, has a lot of series with pseudo nudity like Baywatch but on the other side makes such a big fuss about a bit of breast where you cannot even see the nipple clearly.

Jeez.
 02/03/2004 01:51:36 PM · #16
Someone just e-mailed me a picture taken from the Drudge Report website of Jackson & Timberlake. They both look to be the personification of the word "sleaze" IMHO.
 02/03/2004 01:52:39 PM · #17
Originally posted by Morgan:
All in all, is it not rather ridiculous to consider this momentary (or should I say, monetary) and irrelevant event to be worthy of news reporting? My, my, my, what have we all become?


Exactly! For crying out loud folks, it was just a boob! It's not like they stripped down and went at it on national TV.
02/03/2004 01:54:43 PM · #18
The superbowl was football? I thought it was baseball, lol.

Probably something to do with the word bowl... which of course you call a 'pitch' over there, doh!
 02/03/2004 02:07:25 PM · #19
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Steven Tyler singing the US national anthem at the Indy 500 a couple of years back was far worse than this.

What amazes me is that the US is the homeland of porn movies, porn sites, has a lot of series with pseudo nudity like Baywatch but on the other side makes such a big fuss about a bit of breast where you cannot even see the nipple clearly.

Jeez.


i think the fuss is more over the super being a family type show with children watching and parents who don't want their children to see nudity shouldn't have to deal with that. the comment on pornography is duly noted however "officially" children are well shielded from such things, until they are 18, although i don't know too many teenage boys who haven't seen a naked woman before
 02/03/2004 02:43:21 PM · #20
This is just another gimmick/stunt that the powers that be have come up with to get your mind off of what's really happening in the world and in the nation so that you are uninformed and can be led astray by what they want you to think, as if this is just soooooo important.

CBS, MTV, Viacom, NFL, Janet and Justin are all laughing their way to the bank.
 02/03/2004 03:03:56 PM · #21
Originally posted by GeneralE:
They've already admitted it wasn't an accident.

Although one local radio commentator has pointed out the lack of outrage over the dog holding a man's privates hostage for some beer, or that convincing demonstration of the flammability of equine flatulence.


Actually, alot of the commercials have been openly criticized by media. Every article I've read thus far about the JJ/JT incident, also go indepth regarding the tasteless commercials that were also aired.
 02/03/2004 03:10:16 PM · #22
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Family program my a__ ! The game is filled with violence, the commercials promote alchohol and sexism, there is probably no other sporting event that is connected with as much gambling and everyone is making such a big deal about a little tit (no pun intended). Since when is a woman's body obscene?


I think if L'il Kim had come out with barely anything on, it wouldnt' have been so bad, but like someone already pointed out, ripping off a girl's clothes is ignorant and a bad message which just because "we've seen it all before" doesn't make it right..plus the commercials were totally tasteless and are already under scrutiny as well.
 02/03/2004 03:13:53 PM · #23
Originally posted by Fibre Optix:

From Bill Cinton's cigar to Brittany Spears and Madonna's kiss all the way back to Janet Jackson the American public is outraged at these immoral acts. But they have no problem bombing IRAQ in the name of WMD, when there was none. That some how skipped the moral radar.
Where are my freedom fries?


PEOPLE REALLY NEED TO STOP SAYING THERE ARE NO WMD. I think Louddog [or someone] pointed out in another thread that it's easier to hide a weapon in the dessert [just bury it for one] than a person and we've yet to see Bin Laden - that doesn't mean he doesn't exist. Do you REALLY think [now, turn your brain on] that SADDAM would leave his country unprotected? Bah.
 02/03/2004 03:39:54 PM · #24
Originally posted by GoldBerry:

PEOPLE REALLY NEED TO STOP SAYING THERE ARE NO WMD. I think Louddog [or someone] pointed out in another thread that it's easier to hide a weapon in the dessert [just bury it for one] than a person and we've yet to see Bin Laden - that doesn't mean he doesn't exist. Do you REALLY think [now, turn your brain on] that SADDAM would leave his country unprotected? Bah.


Sure you can bury weapons. The only problem is:

[now, turn on your brain.....and turn off CNN]

- The US declared a MASSIVE collection of WMD's were in Iraq. You can't just bury a MASSIVE stock pile of WMD's with out a clue to where they might be. Hell try to bury 5 acres of cars deep enough not to be caught by metal detectors and leaving the the top soild in tact so that it won't be noticable by airial photos. Oh ya, and make sure the cars don't leak. Now multiply that by 4 and make sure that this construction site can't be seen by satelite.

Wake up!! Even the US Government admits there were no WMDs.
 02/03/2004 03:49:06 PM · #25
Burying was only one suggestion, you can't base an entire argument on one suggestion - well you can [as you did] but it's not credible. And I'm not a follower of CNN, CBC or any one affiliate which you know is controlled by one fat old tycoon sitting in the cayman's pulling strings.

Message edited by author 2004-02-03 15:50:07.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 10:59:35 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 10:59:35 AM EDT.