Latest on MJJC

No Sleep (New Single)

JANET JACKSON'S 'NO SLEEEP' DEBUTS ON R&B/HIP-HOP AIRPLAY CHARTS

Janet Jackson makes her Billboard chart return as "No Sleeep" debuts at No. 15 on the Adult R&B Songs chart (dated July 11) The sultry song marks her first entry on the list in five years; her last, "Nothing," peaked at No. 15 in May 2010.
"No Sleeep" grants Jackson her 27th hit on Adult R&B Songs (which originated in 1993), tying her with Faith Evans for third-most visits among women. Mary J. Blige leads with 51, followed by Mariah Carey (33). The debut also earns Jackson her highest entrance ever on the chart.
The new single concurrently bows on R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay at No. 27 with 6.7 million in first-week audience, according to Nielsen Music, marking her 36th hit on the chart. It's her highest debut in more than 20 years: "Scream," with brother Michael, launched at No. 6 on June 3, 1995. Janet Jackson's "That's the Way Love Goes" remains the record-holder as the only song to debut at No. 1 on R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay (May 1, 1993).

An early supporter of "No Sleeep," adult R&B WDAS Philadelphia, played the track 22 times during the tracking week ending June 28. Derrick "DC" Corbett, the station's director of urban programming, tells Billboard that the song "just felt like us. It's a perfect summertime groove, and it's rare when you hear a song and everyone's opinion of the record within the building is ultra-positive. That, coupled with the fact that she's an icon that we all grew up with, made it a no-brainer for us.


"We're happy to be a small contributor to her success with ['Sleeep'], and it's exciting to have her back in the mix."
The single arrived on June 22, a week after Jackson announced her Unbreakable World Tour, which is slated to kick off in Vancouver, B.C. on Aug. 31, with the first leg of North American dates planned through Nov. 13.
"No Sleeep," produced by longtime collaborators Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, previews Jackson's upcoming studio album, due in the fall, her first since 2008's Discipline.

https://www.yahoo.com/music/s/janet-jacksons-no-sleeep-debuts-r-b-hip-222310848.html
 
Tygger;4096832 said:
I am unsure if you are confusing commercial success with the merits of artistic work which will dictate groundbreaking work. Example: many have said Michael’s artistic peak/most groundbreaking work was Thriller because of its commercial success however; many would say his artistic peak would be his more mature albums, i.e., Dangerous, and/or later works.
Click to expand...

No I am not confusing commercial success with the merits of artistic work, but I am of the opinion that his current music is not as groundbreaking at all and is nowhere near to the quality of music he produced in his hey day. And no, that does not mean I think Purple Rain was his artistic peak which was his most commercially successful album. So it's wrong to assume that I confuse commercial success with artistic merit. Never in this debate I said Prince is current music is less good artistically because it is less successful commercially. The Sign O' The Times album had relatively little commercial success and I think it is genius. So no, my judgement has nothing to do with commercial success and I never indicated it did. I just don't see the groundbreakingness in albums like Art Official Age or songs like Rock and Roll Affair, that's all. Which is what we were talking about here, not commercial success.

As for Janet, I said: “I personally do not remember Janet being blackballed by U.S. media.” A little more research would show she was embraced by some non-Viacom outlets. This is very similar to outlets who did not shun Michael in 2005. Those were mostly R/B-outlets (her roots as another poster stated) such as BET which is where I saw her promoting Damita Jo and where her video for the album was aired. R/B radio stations continued to play her as well and the commercial success of Damita Jo meant the methods used by these Viacom outlets and some non-Viacom outlets were not necessarily successful.
Click to expand...

If a pop star of her caliber was only played by R&B stations and Viacom totally boycotted her then that IS a blacklist.
 
respect77;4096758 said:
OK, because that's how I understood it as well.

The fact is that it happens rarely (if ever) that a 50-60-year old artists breaks new grounds in popular music. I don't know why is that but that's the fact. And if we do not set such high standards for other artists then why do we set it for Janet? Is that fair?

I do not limit anything. I simply point out a fact, which is that you do not see many (if any at all) 50-60-year-old artists in popular music who set new standards or do groundbreaking things in music. To pont this fact out is not a prejudice but a simple fact. If you do not think it is a fact you should give examples rather than just dismissing my position as "prejudice" and "not making sense", "narrow-minded", "unacceptable" and whatnot. Rather than just labelling my opinion I'd be more interested in actual facts and arguments about why it is fair to expect this from Janet when we do not expect it from anyone else from her peers? Is there a reason for why you expect more from her artistically than Prince or Madonna? Do you hold her in higher regards artistically?

And I do not want to make it about Prince, but his appeal and success has been far from being "constant", but again your reply was pretty much besides the points I was making.
Click to expand...

I think it makes sense to have high hopes of Janet because she is the type of artist who can (to some extent) create culture. She has already paved the way for many of her contemporaries & in more than one ways (musically, vocally, stylistically, etc.). This artistic flair has been inherent in her nature & although sometimes may seem inert (or not be fully utilized) it cannot suddenly disappear just because of her age. Nobody can be really sure when (& to what extent) her artistic gift reappears.

Also, to simply pinpoint a fact makes sense (in music). But, when it is further used as a general rule (that almost each & every one artist must fit in specific generalizations) then I think it becomes something else & cannot be called (even loosely) a fact.

Additionally, Prince’s audience is probably one of the most diversified in the world. To form an opinion (regarding his audience/fans) that is mostly based on a specific online community it really sounds like a forgone conclusion.
 
Respect77, maybe you have realized that groundbreaking work is a matter of opinion. If a majority/minority believes a particular work is groundbreaking it means a majority/minority hold that opinion only. There is no factual information regarding groundbreaking work because art is subjective. Thus, many do rely on commercial success when labeling pop musical works as groundbreaking.

Again, “I personally do not remember Janet being blackballed by U.S. media.” I prefer R/B oriented music channels/radio stations so any blacklisting had no effect for me. I was also clear non-Viacom media outlets were NOT only R/B oriented as I posted Janet on Jay Leno’s late night U.S. television show which is not R/B oriented. Please understand Viacom-media outlets do not hold a monopoly in the U.S. If one does not frequent Viacom and/or non-Viacom outlets who participated in the blacklisting (unfairly) of Janet, how would the blacklisting effect them? This should be clear based on the commercial success of Damita Jo and how many U.S. programs Janet performed All Nite live (no lip-synching) which was a feat in and of itself.
 
Tygger said:
If one does not frequent Viacom and/or non-Viacom outlets who participated in the blacklisting (unfairly) of Janet, how would the blacklisting effect them? This should be clear based on the commercial success of Damita Jo and how many U.S. programs Janet performed All Nite live (no lip-synching) which was a feat in and of itself.
Click to expand...

Well, according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Jackson_discography Damita Jo sold about one third of the amount Janet's previous album All For You sold in the US (1 million vs. 3 million). Also Damita Jo was Janet's first album since Control that did not reach #1 in the US. In other countries there was an even bigger gap between the chart positions Damita Jo achieved compared to the chart positions Janet's previous albums achieved.

Some bigger countries:

UK

Damita Jo peak position: #32
All For You: #2

France
Damita Jo: #35
All For You: #2

Germany

Damita Jo: #21
All For You: #3

Australia

Damita Jo: #18
All For You: #3

Canada

Damita Jo: #7
All For You: #1


If you think this had nothing to do with the Viacom boycott, fine, but then what is your explanation for Janet's sudden decline in popularity at the time?
 
Respect77, I am unsure how many times I have to repeat that Viacom’s blacklisting unfairly of Janet had no effect on me. Due to its commercial success, we can be sure many others who are/were her (maybe characterized as die-hard) fans purchased Damita Jo despite the blacklisting at the time.

Her performance at the SuperBowl was the major factor that caused what could be characterized as her fair-weather fans to reject her at that time. As you have shown, Janet realized commercial success before Damita Jo. Those who experienced that time could tell you that success was not particularly looked upon favorably by some; a similar some that did not favor her commercially successful brother. While it was acceptable for Madonna to be considered the fabricated Queen of Pop who authored a graphic, nude book, it was not acceptable that Janet be considered the QOP despite her sale numbers. Some in the media spun that event to their advantage which is very similar to how they spun several events in Michael’s life to their advantage. Janet suffered a racist, sexist, and unfair blacklisting by Viacom and some non-Viacom outlets and Janet continued to enjoy commercial success with Damita Jo as she deserved. Her cowardly partner, Timberlake, bore no responsibility and we all are very aware of his posthumous duet with Janet’s older brother who was very supportive of his sister at the time.

Viacom could not stop anyone from purchasing Damita Jo. If you are able to state when the blacklisting ended and can show Viacom's support of Janet’s albums after Damita Jo caused them to be more commercially successful than Damita Jo, then, I will be more inclined to believe that Viacom's blacklisting actually had some power over Janet's commercial success.
 
Tygger said:
Janet suffered a racist, sexist, and unfair blacklisting by Viacom and some non-Viacom outlets
Click to expand...

You initially said that you do not remember any blacklisting whatsoever - that was the whole starting point of this discussion. I'm glad I helped you to remember.
 
Respect77, it seems it was easier to spin my statement instead of proving the blacklisting had actual power over Janet's successes or - in your view it seems - lack thereof.

As I have stated several times now: the blacklisting had no effect on me. That is probably why I do not and still do not remember the blacklisting but, I do know now it existed and I give you credit for that. How successful the blacklisting was has yet to be proven and I assume it will not be proven by any online article that can be posted because Damita Jo was commercially successful.

Questions please: are there any Janet fans who remember the Super Bowl events and can state if those events changed your perception of Janet so much so that you did not purchase Damita Jo or later albums? Did the Viacom blacklisting effect you?
 
Last edited:
The Superbowl incident had no effect on me, but I do believe Janet was harshly and unfairly treated in its aftermath.

As far as the whole question of mature artists and their impact on today's world I think it's good to recall Pablo Picasso who did some of his best work later in his career. I think it was Madonna herself who pointed that out some time ago. However, his craftmanship did not involve anywhere near the physical engagement a performer needs. Irrespectively, I do feel sorry for these ladies who not only have to deal with sexism, but also with ageism.

In all honesty though, it is true that most people's peaks (creative and otherwise) tend to be in their 20s and 30s.
 
Tygger;4096972 said:
Questions please: are there any Janet fans who remember the Super Bowl events and can state if those events changed your perception of Janet so much so that you did not purchase Damita Jo or later albums? Did the Viacom blacklisting effect you?
Click to expand...

Personally, I do not think that the Super Bowl incident was more (sexually) explicit than some of her subsequent song lyrics (for example, ‘Moist’, ‘Take Care’, ‘Warmth’).
 
I remember watching Janet and Justin during the Superbowl 2004. I actually missed the flash of boob, believe it or not. :laugh: I had just given birth to my second son a few days ago. It didn't change my perception of her; I bought all her music after the controversy. And I wasn't aware of a Viacom blacklisting.

I also agree that some of her song lyrics are very sexually explicit, much more so than a half second of bare breast on television.
 
Chart News ?@chartnews 14 Min.Vor 14 Minuten

Billboard Hot 100: #67(new) No Sleeep, @JanetJackson. *her 40th chart entry*
 
Nice to see the blacklisting did not effect others. It is similar to censorship.

I agree her lyrics are more explicit than that one performance. Her live performance of Discipline is far more explicit. Janet always attempted to separate herself from the squeaky clean image the Jacksons have. I am unsure how successful she was in that.

Girl said:
In all honesty though, it is true that most people's peaks (creative and otherwise) tend to be in their 20s and 30s.
Click to expand...

Michael was similar to Picasso in that he had quite a few projects he was working on along with TII. (I understand however you said most and not all.)
 
Tygger;4097092 said:
Nice to see the blacklisting did not effect others. It is similar to censorship.

I agree her lyrics are more explicit than that one performance. Her live performance of Discipline is far more explicit. Janet always attempted to separate herself from the squeaky clean image the Jacksons have. I am unsure how successful she was in that.
Click to expand...

I think it was not always (very) successful.

For example, the live performance of ‘Would You Mind’ (‘All For You’ Tour) seemed too pre-planned, too pretentious, too showy &, in my opinion, it did not add necessarily to her sexual image.

Also, Janet should get rid of those rainy/thunderous sound effects that (mostly) are used as sexual metaphors (or at least limit them at the bare minimum). Furthermore, I expect Janet’s new songs to be thematically & vocally diversified because when she achieves that, then the final outcome sounds very good (‘This Body’, for example).
 
The song dropped to 231 in worldwide i-tunes-charts. I think tomorrow it will out of the list. The Bet-award-appearence had only little impact for 1 or 2 days in the USA for the song. I also think it was a bad deciscion to not perform herself.

http://kworb.net/ww/
 
mj_frenzy said:
I think it was not always (very) successful.
Click to expand...

For me, it was never successful but I understand why she attempted to distance herself from that clean image. I will admit to placing her on a pedestal. None of her actions has made me question that placement thus far.
 
Tygger;4097153 said:
For me, it was never successful but I understand why she attempted to distance herself from that clean image. I will admit to placing her on a pedestal. None of her actions has made me question that placement thus far.
Click to expand...

I think, Janet (initially) placed herself on that pedestal when she released her ‘Love Will Never Do (Without You)’ video clip.
 
And in fact, 12 days after release of the new single the song is out of the 250 list of world i-tunes charts and on I-Tunes USA on 93 (her strongest country). And this although her comeback and her comeback song was accompanied with good press (people in this thread spoke about glowing reports and real exitemenent) and only days after a award-appearance.
http://kworb.net/ww/

It`s really a sign of lack of fan base. Before Michael's death in 2008 she was really out of the spotlight and intrest. With Michael Jackson's death all Jacksons came back in the public eye, also Janet. A few weeks after his death she released her Best of "Number Ones" (Michaels Number ONES was at this time the best selling album in USA and world-wide bestseller). In her subsequent Number Ones world tour she was able to fill manly small theatres and in Europe generally the capitals (Berlin Tempodrom with 3,000 visitors). A significant part of the audience in my opinion were Michael Jackson fans (old and new). In 2015 she lost at least a part of them already and her role in the "Granny kidnapping" certainly plays a role.
Some people complained that ""Granny kidnapping" is a real OT in this thread, but I think it isn`t.
The promotion of a her new jewelery-collection and using it as a promotiona tool on tour is my opinion also a not good public relations strategy. On stage to stand with jewels that cost millions demonstrated a vast distance from the fan base.

But I may be wrong in all this. The coming months will tell.
 
Last edited:
Annita;4097229 said:
The promotion of her new jewelry collection and using it as a promotional tool on tour is in my opinion also a not good public relations strategy. On stage to stand with jewels that cost millions demonstrated a vast distance from the fan base.
Click to expand...

That's what happens when you are rich and marry a billionaire... I completely agree. I can get down with jewelry lines, but I can barely afford a $100 ticket to her show let alone a diamond necklace?

"If you’re looking to get a sneak peek at the collection, Janet’s one step ahead of you. The 25 carat heart-shaped necklace and the 13-carat diamond ring she wore to this year’s BET Awards are pieces from her upcoming line, and they retail at $2 million and $500,000, respectively. Here’s to hoping Claire’s comes through with knockoffs at some point."

 
TinnyandOdd;4097234 said:
That's what happens when you are rich and marry a billionaire... I completely agree. I can get down with jewelry lines, but I can barely afford a $100 ticket to her show let alone a diamond necklace?

"If you’re looking to get a sneak peek at the collection, Janet’s one step ahead of you. The 25 carat heart-shaped necklace and the 13-carat diamond ring she wore to this year’s BET Awards are pieces from her upcoming line, and they retail at $2 million and $500,000, respectively. Here’s to hoping Claire’s comes through with knockoffs at some point."
Click to expand...
:DWhen I read that original article, there wasn't much to it, except that two pieces of her jewelry were 2 million and 500,000K-I wasn't sure if that was the real jewelry line she was promoting, or was it a much less expensive line geared to fans that were duplicates of her own pieces. Still haven't heard anything else.
 
barbee0715 said:
:DWhen I read that original article, there wasn't much to it, except that two pieces of her jewelry were 2 million and 500,000K-I wasn't sure if that was the real jewelry line she was promoting, or was it a much less expensive line geared to fans that were duplicates of her own pieces. Still haven't heard anything else.
Click to expand...

Well if this is the case, I'll go buy some Elizabeth Taylor jewelry instead :p
 
Annita said:
And in fact, 12 days after release of the new single the song is out of the 250 list of world i-tunes charts and on I-Tunes USA on 93 (her strongest country). And this although her comeback and her comeback song was accompanied with good press (people in this thread spoke about glowing reports and real exitemenent) and only days after a award-appearance.
http://kworb.net/ww/

It`s really a sign of lack of fan base. Before Michael's death in 2008 she was really out of the spotlight and intrest. With Michael Jackson's death all Jacksons came back in the public eye, also Janet. A few weeks after his death she released her Best of "Number Ones" (Michaels Number ONES was at this time the best selling album in USA and world-wide bestseller). In her subsequent Number Ones world tour she was able to fill manly small theatres and in Europe generally the capitals (Berlin Tempodrom with 3,000 visitors). A significant part of the audience in my opinion were Michael Jackson fans (old and new). In 2015 she lost at least a part of them already and her role in the "Granny kidnapping" certainly plays a role.
Some people complained that ""Granny kidnapping" is a real OT in this thread, but I think it isn`t.
The promotion of a her new jewelery-collection and using it as a promotiona tool on tour is my opinion also a not good public relations strategy. On stage to stand with jewels that cost millions demonstrated a vast distance from the fan base.

But I may be wrong in all this. The coming months will tell.
Click to expand...




oh just stop the song is doing well considering she's not promoting it and , The song just debuted at 67 , without a video or promotion , Madonna's last singles didn't even chart ,so I don,t know where your getting this " lack of fanbase" from and most of the tour is mostly sold out during pres-sale at that.
 
strawberry45220 said:
oh just stop the song is doing well considering she's not promoting it and , The song just debuted at 67 , without a video or promotion , Madonna's last singles didn't even chart ,so I don,t know where your getting this " lack of fanbase" from and most of the tour is mostly sold out during pres-sale at that.[/QUOTE
Click to expand...
 
strawberry45220 said:
oh just stop the song is doing well considering she's not promoting it and , The song just debuted at 67 , without a video or promotion , Madonna's last singles didn't even chart ,so I don,t know where your getting this " lack of fanbase" from and most of the tour is mostly sold out during pres-sale at that.
Click to expand...

I've only heard about three venues being sold out- Hawaii- 2 shows at 18,000 each; Chicago- 2 shows @ 3,800 each; Atlanta- around 7,000. This info was posted on another forum by a Janet fan. Maybe I missed something but I have not seen anymore updates. Someone even posted that some of those venues would be cut in half because tickets are not selling. I guess she will release more info in the coming weeks.

Btw, the single is getting PLENTY of promotion from the media and radio. Therefore, no Janet fan can claim that it is not being promoted. IT IS!
 
somewhereinthedark said:
Btw, the single is getting PLENTY of promotion from the media and radio. Therefore, no Janet fan can claim that it is not being promoted. IT IS!
Click to expand...
Good. Like I wrote earlier, all the media that announced the single were ecstatic that she was coming back. Haven't heard any radio promotion yet-but it's early. She knows what she's doing.
 
somewhereinthedark said:
I've only heard about three venues being sold out- Hawaii- 2 shows at 18,000 each; Chicago- 2 shows @ 3,800 each; Atlanta- around 7,000. This info was posted on another forum by a Janet fan. Maybe I missed something but I have not seen anymore updates. Someone even posted that some of those venues would be cut in half because tickets are not selling. I guess she will release more info in the coming weeks.

Btw, the single is getting PLENTY of promotion from the media and radio. Therefore, no Janet fan can claim that it is not being promoted. IT IS!
Click to expand...


the tour is just about sold out the shows remaining have only single and reselling tickets left and yes they were the shows that just sold out during pre sale sale and just stop they were not cut in half because they are not selling well quit pulling stuff out of your behind
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top