Latest on MJJC

Former FCC Chairman Admits Janet Jackson Was Treated “Unfairly” After Super Bowl

My problem with the FCC is that when she told them it was an accident why did they continue with the fines. All people had to do was have a rational person explain the situation. If someone had to perform with those tear-away clothes, like Michael used, and there was a plan to have a dancer pull the outfit off, and underneath was something like a Beyonce "underwear" costume, and the person pulled too hard and the "underwear" costume pulled showing part of a breast, would they fine the show too for this mistake? If a performer's shirt sleeve gets caught in a fan and it pulls the shirt, pops the buttons and we see part of a breast, would they fine the production for this mistake too?
 
Make the Super Bowl a pay per view event, mic the coaches and players, then let it rip! Show the biggest game in all of its guts and glory. If another wardrobe "malfunction" happens, let it be on the field, baby. . . :lmao:
 
By Danielle Joynson, Staff Reporter
Filed: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 at 14:32 UK


Last Updated: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 at 14:34 UK
Janet Jackson will reportedly not be welcomed back by NFL bosses anytime soon following her wardrobe malfunction during the Super Bowl half-time show back in 2004.
The American singer, who is the sister of the late Michael Jackson, had part of her bodice torn off by Justin Timberlake during their performance 10 years ago.
As the League consider the lineup for next February's half-time show in Arizona, it appears that Jackson remains out of the picture.
According to TMZ, a statement from the League said: "As for potential acts, we have only ruled out Janet Jackson."
Reports have claimed that Rihanna, Katy Perry and Coldplay are being targeted by the NFL for the show, but could be asked to pay to perform.
Click to expand...

http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/off-the...-jackson-remains-on-nfl-blacklist_172187.html

If they admitted she was unfairly treated then why is she still on the black list? And as the only artist? If so then why not Timberlake as well?

I know that Janet would not do the NFL halftime show currently anyway, but it's so messed up she's still blacklisted. And that while Timberlake is not.

You have to admit there are different standards in the media for these Jacksons... And I'm not even a Jackson family or Janet fan.
 
Sometimes I think they came down hard on Janet because of what they probably thought about Michael. The only person to admit that she was treated unfairly only said so after he left the company. The bosses that are still in the company apparently want her to remain on the blacklist. It is still not right though.
 
Yeah, it was shitty that Janet got singled out and Justin got of the hook. Just like Miley got all the shit and Robin Thicke got none.

Sexism like this happen all the time. I'm a huge Courtney Love fan and she constantly get grief over things male rockstars get away with all the time.
I mean, Kurt Cobain is viewed as a tortured genius, but Courtney Love is looked at as a junkie whore. How is that fair?

Sexism is still a huge problem.

That aside, I think only people in the US cared about Nipplegate. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember anyone here in Denmark caring in the least. Hell, I'm an MJ fan and I didn't even care.
 
Even though I don't feel sorry for her nowadays, chauvinism and sexism is idiotic and medieval. I guess we still live in a phallocentric society in the 21sf century despite the fights for human rights, equality technological and scientific advances.

There are far worse and more offensive things to see than an exposed breast with a linchpin on TBH. It offends me watching pictures/videos of children participating in wars, starving to death. Or even that picture I mentioned before being released after the Super Bowl where a female US Marine poses smiling with a pile of nude Iraqi war prisoners. Those things are not only offensive, they violate human rights.
 
I agree it’s pretty chauvinistic, prejudice and outright draconian to single her out when everything in the entertainment business is over sexualized these days. Maybe it's just Janet getting back some of her own karma.
 
The wrong Jackson had the "wardrobe malfunction" imho. . . :fear: :evil: ;)

2aa57cb1-ccf0-48aa-b186-6f2de5c58cb1_zpsaa3e2233.jpg



:coffee: I didn't feel sorry for Janet then, don't feel sorry for her NOW.
 
I agree with Jermaine that it's unfair it's only Janet and not Justin too.

But saying who cares because Janet is married to a millionaire makes no sense to me at all. But I guess it just shows what's important to Jermaine - money. If you have access to that then why care about anything else?
 
Bubs said:
Jermaine and his tits have commented about nipplegate too: "who cares, she is married to a billionaire"
http://www.tmz.com/2014/08/20/jerma...kson-nfl-super-bowl-halftime-blacklisted-ban/

:smilerolleyes:
Click to expand...

What kind of dumb response is that? Why is everything he talks about money related?

The only thing I agree with is this, if Janet is banned so should Justin. But none of this would have happened if Janet had just focused on putting on a good performance and not trying to have a water cooler moment for the next days buzz.
 
No, Janet Jackson isn't banned from the Super Bowl

by Ahiza Garcia October 23, 2017 CNN Money Sport

When Justin Timberlake was announced Sunday as the halftime entertainment for Super Bowl LII, some people wondered whether Jackson had been snubbed.

After all, she and Timberlake were together for the infamous Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction, also known as Nipplegate. At Super Bowl XXXVIII, in 2004, Timberlake ripped away part of Jackson's costume, exposing one of her breasts to a TV audience of 140 million.

Jackson's spokesperson said it was an accident, and Timberlake apologized.

So when Timberlake was announced for next year's game, the internet lit up with questions about why Jackson wasn't invited.

"No ban, no," NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said. He refused to comment on "any speculation regarding potential guests," and he said there may be no guests. Jackson's representatives did not return a request for comment.

McCarthy called Timberlake the "ultimate global superstar" who will put on an "entertaining and unifying show that will appeal to the massive worldwide audience."

The NFL has promoted a message of unity since President Trump began attacking players for kneeling during the National Anthem to protest racial injustice.

Jackson is on her State of the World tour, in which she's denounced white supremacy, prejudice and xenophobia. And she has long made social statements in her music. In "Rhythm Nation," released in 1989, she sang about breaking color lines and protesting social injustice.

This will be Timberlake's third Super Bowl appearance. He also performed at Super Bowl XXXV, in 2001, as part of *NSYNC.
 
I've always said that Janet planned this stunt. The problem is that she didn't plan the reaction. She thought since the media and public had always proclaimed her the so-called "normal" one that she could pull this stunt and get away with it. She never in a million years expected the reaction that she received. She thought that she could pull a Madonna and shock people. She knew that the bra was going to tear away, that's why she wore a nipple pierce- a star shape. The person who made her costume said that the bra was specifically made to tear away and reveal the nipple piercing. One doesn't have to be an Einstein to KNOW that this was PLANNED. This was no wardrobe malfunction. Even her brothers-Jermaine and Randy, told ENtertainment Tonight that Janet had planned something shocking. It amazes me that her fans have conveniently forgotten these things.
Even if the media reaction was overblown, Janet knew what she was doing, planned it, etc . She just thought that it would boost her career and add some shock value to it. I would have had more respect for her if she had been HONEST and admitted that her plan backfired. Instead, all of these years she has misled her fans and the public, by claiming that she didn't know that Justin was going to pull away her bra. The bra was designed to be pulled away just as Justin did , this is according to the designer. Bottomline is that Janet's PLANNED stunt was not received as she THOUGHT it was going to be. Justin didn't plan this stunt, she did. I am sure that he knew that her nipple was going to be exposed, just as SHE did. Btw, I am not a fan of Justin OR Janet. It just makes me want to throw up that some people want to blame Justin for something that was Janet's plan and subsequent fault. There was no accident or "wardrobe malfunction ".
 
Food for thought........http://www.laineygossip.c...show/48221

Justin Timberlake’s Super Bowl
October 24, 2017 at 12:27 AM by Lainey

It’s official. Justin Timberlake will headline the halftime show at Super Bowl LII in Minneapolis. I’ve written about this already – twice. I wrote about it when the rumours first started back in August and again a month later when it was reported that JT was in final negotiations. So I don’t want to repeat what I said. Because…again… I told you. I told you back in February, after the last Super Bowl, when he appeared in a Super Bowl ad for some energy drink he was promoting. This is what I told you:


JT wasn’t at the Super Bowl. But this ad gave him a presence at the Super Bowl. And anytime he’s comes anywhere near the Super Bowl… well… if you’ve been reading this blog for a while, you know what I’m thinking.

#NeverForget

So he gets to make money from the Super Bowl and …what about Janet? Is anyone asking Janet Jackson to front a Super Bowl commercial? Has anybody asked Janet to front anything since he exposed her nipple over a decade ago? That would be no, because she’s permanently banned from the Super Bowl. Meanwhile, he gets to make Super Bowl ads and it’s only a matter of time. A matter of time before he gets invited to be the halftime performer.

This, then, should not be a surprise. How is it a surprise? White men who step on women succeed all the time. White men who step on black woman succeed even more. It’s gross. But what’s grosser is that it’s actually not that gross for a lot of people. Probably for a majority of people. Those are the people who are excited about this announcement. They’re the people who keep telling the rest of us to “get over it”, it happened a long time ago, and that we all need to move on. Because “moving on” is its own privilege. Two people were up there on that stage on February 1, 2004. One of them, at the time, was the bigger star. In 2004, Janet Jackson was the legend, one of the most successful women in music. She and her brother, Michael, endorsed Justin Timberlake. THEY HELPED HIM WITH HIS CAREER. How did he repay her? By running for cover, the weasel punk f-ck that he is, and leaving her for dead. Two people were up on that stage that night. One was blacklisted and banned. The other was invited to every party and would go on to become one of the most successful solo artists of the decade. Not everyone, then, is allowed to “move on”. The same people, over and over again, get to “move on”. Others have to keep eating sh-t until someone else decides that they’re ready to be let out of the doghouse.

Is it possible that JT will invite Janet to join him at the Super Bowl, to right the wrong, to formally apologise for what happened? This is what’s been suggested. He would need, though, to clear it through the NFL and Pepsi first. Which would mean that Janet would need PERMISSION from the NFL, the people who blacklisted and banned her in the first place. Just the thought of this makes me sick – imagining Janet having to SEEK PERMISSION, like approval, like a “pass” from those people to be allowed to come back.


Do we really want that for her? Do we want to put her return to the Super Bowl in the hands of a group of white owners sitting at a boardroom, deliberating over whether or not to grant entrance to Janet Jackson? I want you to picture that. I want you to picture those men, smoking their cigars, inflated by their self-importance, gathered together judging Janet’s suitability for the Super Bowl in between deciding what to have for lunch and where to take their mistresses for dinner. Like THEY get to decide whether or not she would be welcome? As an act of magnanimity?

F-ck that. F-CK THAT SO HARD.

And also? If not them, who else do you think will get all the credit, and I mean ALL THE CREDIT, if Janet actually shows up to perform with him? When has Justin Timberlake ever walked away from taking all the credit, and turning any situation into a showcase for himself?

Finally, there’s another factor to consider: the NFL’s ratings have been on the decline. And players continue to kneel during the national anthem. These have been the major headlines surrounding the league for months as deep divisions between owners and players and players and fans continue to dominate the discussion. THAT’s the Super Bowl Justin Timberlake is stepping into. That might be the only positive takeaway from this story?
 
JT at the baseball game http://www.laineygossip.c...kson/48260

Games 1 and 2 of the World Series happened in Los Angeles this week as the Dodgers are playing the Houston Astros for the championship. There were a lot of celebrities in the crowd last night – among them Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel. Amazingly he managed to stay in his seat and not make the game about himself. But, then again, he’s had his share of headlines already over the last few days.

JT is headlining the halftime show at the Super Bowl. A few people have tried to steer the conversation away from Janet Jackson and how unfair it’s been in the 14 years since the wardrobe malfunction, wondering what the set list will be, and how much NSYNC we’ll hear that night. Can’t Stop The Feeling, worst song of 2016, that has to be the closer, non?


That’s been the sidebar though. The main discussion, obviously, has been about Janet and Justin and how he did her wrong and whether or not he’ll right that wrong. A lot of people think that for sure she’s going to show up. Because the NFL claimed this week that “there’s no ban”. NOW there’s no ban. We’ve been talking about the Janet Jackson ban for YEARS. Why is it that they’ve only come out to say that “there’s no ban” in 2017? And what’s the apostrophe for? Is the apostrophe for “there IS no ban”? Or is it for “there WAS no ban?”

Needless to say, everyone now is trying to distance themselves from the way Janet was treated in the years after the Super Bowl in 2004. Because the way she was treated – by the NFL, by the FCC, by Viacom (they blacklisted her music across their properties and severely restricted radio play of her catalogue), by the Grammys, and, yes, by Justin Timberlake – was a group effort. And so, if she returns with Justin Timberlake, will that serve as a group pardon? Should there be a group pardon?

And, really, is it that simple?

I hate that she might find herself in a position where all these assholes are like, oh hi Janet, we want you back! And if she says no, you KNOW, YOU F-CKING KNOW, what they’ll say about her. How they’ll call her ungrateful and ungracious. How they’ll say they tried. And she was the one who said no.


This is what Janet retweeted the other day, on the 28th anniversary of the release of Rhythm Nation, the single:


Janet Jackson
@JanetJackson
Thank u @BET. Iconic ≠ Ignorance. (link: http://bet.com/music/2017...view.html) bet.com/music/2017/09/…

It’s a link to a BET article about her tour. About the themes that she’s been addressing on tour, which are consistent with the themes she’s been addressing since Rhythm Nation.

Join voices in protest
To social injustice
A generation full of courage
Come forth with me
People of the world today
Are we looking for a better way of life
We are a part of the rhythm nation

Colin Kaepernick protested social injustice, police brutality, on the field last year. And no team in the NFL, to date, has picked him up. He’s signed a book deal but he can’t sign a playing deal. Perhaps by February the situation in the NFL will have changed. But if it remains the way it is today, can you see Janet Jackson take the stage holding hands with the white man – and men – who held her down?
 
Why Justin Timberlake owes Janet Jackson a Super Bowl-size apology https://www.usatoday.com/...790290001/

Justin Timberlake needs to apologize to Janet Jackson. He should start apologizing now, with the news that he's ...

Justin Timberlake needs to apologize to Janet Jackson. He should start apologizing now, with the news that he's confirmed to perform at t...ftime show. He should do so as publicly as possible. And at the very least, he should invite her onstage at the show, to perform a song, or 10.

Those are several demands of the viral #JusticeForJanet hashtag, which emerged following the news of Timberlake's halftime booking. Because, even as Timberlake's career has flourished in the 13 years since "Nipplegate," Jackson's fans haven't forgotten that Timberlake is complicit in the unjust treatment of their icon.

In a moment that’s still painful to watch more than a decade later, Timberlake exposed Jackson's breast during her Super Bowl halftime show in 2004 in front of an audience of 143.6 million viewers. The night was supposed to belong to Jackson, who was the seasoned pop star to Timberlake’s rookie. Jackson had invited the then-rising boy band *NSYNC to open for her Velvet Rope tour in 1998, then lent her vocals to Timberlake’s debut album, Justified, after he went solo.

Considering how Timberlake has molded himself in Michael Jackson’s image from the beginning of his solo career, his Super Bowl cameo was meant to be a reunion with his mentor, a chance for him to pay homage to Janet’s pop legacy.

Timberlake needs to apologize because he played a role in hijacking this legacy, starting with the wardrobe malfunction that barely impacted his career while sending Jackson's into free-fall.

In the weeks after the “wardrobe malfunction,” a phrase that will be forever linked to Jackson’s humiliation, she became a comedy punchline and was blacklisted by Viacom (which kept her music off MTV, VH1, and radio stations around the country).

There seemed to be no question the incident was Jackson’s fault, down to the media outlets that selectively edited her videotaped apology. “Sometimes they cut out that I said it was an accident,” she later told Ebony.

And while Timberlake has maintained that the incident was an accident, he hasn't taken responsibility for the part he played. "I'm frustrated at the whole situation," he told reporters the week after the Super Bowl. "I'm frustrated that my character is being questioned. And the fact of the matter is, you know, I've had a good year, a really good year, especially with my music."

Timberlake has apologized further in the years since, telling MTV in 2006 that he "probably got 10% of the blame," and that America is "unfairly harsh on ethnic people." Yet, he's still unsure how to address the scandal, bungling an exchange last year when a Twitter follower called on him to "stop appropriating our music and culture" and "apologize to Janet too.”

"Oh, you sweet soul," he responded. "The more you realize that we are the same, the more we can have a conversation. Bye.”

Timberlake is very much not "the same." His privilege hasn't only enabled him to score hit albums and film roles and Oscar nominations and a Super Bowl slot, but also lets him play dumb about his own role in a scandal that, as he previously acknowledged, amounted to America piling on a black woman and shaming her for her sexuality while granting him a free pass.

And Timberlake needs to apologize now, more than ever, considering how the news of his booking comes during a blistering month for women reckoning with sexual humiliation. In the wake of Harvey Weinstein’s downfall, women around the world have continued to share their stories about how men’s inappropriate actions ruined their lives.

Seeing Timberlake invited back to the Super Bowl while Jackson’s career still bears visible scars from the incident is a bitter reminder of which people society punishes more for so-called sexual indiscretions.
 
somewhereinthedark;4210503 said:
I've always said that Janet planned this stunt. The problem is that she didn't plan the reaction. She thought since the media and public had always proclaimed her the so-called "normal" one that she could pull this stunt and get away with it. She never in a million years expected the reaction that she received. She thought that she could pull a Madonna and shock people. She knew that the bra was going to tear away, that's why she wore a nipple pierce- a star shape. The person who made her costume said that the bra was specifically made to tear away and reveal the nipple piercing. One doesn't have to be an Einstein to KNOW that this was PLANNED. This was no wardrobe malfunction. Even her brothers-Jermaine and Randy, told ENtertainment Tonight that Janet had planned something shocking. It amazes me that her fans have conveniently forgotten these things.
Even if the media reaction was overblown, Janet knew what she was doing, planned it, etc . She just thought that it would boost her career and add some shock value to it. I would have had more respect for her if she had been HONEST and admitted that her plan backfired. Instead, all of these years she has misled her fans and the public, by claiming that she didn't know that Justin was going to pull away her bra. The bra was designed to be pulled away just as Justin did , this is according to the designer. Bottomline is that Janet's PLANNED stunt was not received as she THOUGHT it was going to be. Justin didn't plan this stunt, she did. I am sure that he knew that her nipple was going to be exposed, just as SHE did. Btw, I am not a fan of Justin OR Janet. It just makes me want to throw up that some people want to blame Justin for something that was Janet's plan and subsequent fault. There was no accident or "wardrobe malfunction ".
Click to expand...

Of course Janet planned it (she did a similar thing in at back during the 1990 MTV Awards) Here is a reminder of that performance.....

[video=youtube;jtYBNA6N17c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtYBNA6N17c[/video]

However, Justin also knew about it, happily participated and initially boasted about it until the backlash set in.

<blockquote class="twitter-video" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Seemed pretty geeked to me. Not a bit of &quot;I don&#39;t deserve this kind of publicity&quot; &quot;I was appalled&quot; you tried it you ugly snake <a href="https://twitter.com/jtimberlake?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jtimberlake</a> <a href="https://t.co/QtWEGnV3ED">pic.twitter.com/QtWEGnV3ED</a></p>&mdash; moonchild &#2384; (@mzshannon) <a href="https://twitter.com/mzshannon/status/922335537469550598?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


IMO they are BOTH at fault. The reason why a lot of people are still upset today, is because of how Janet was treated afterwards......like a piece of dog shit, while Justin threw her under the bus and got rewarded for it, because WHITE MALE PRIVILEGE. Sure Janet has done some dodgy things (eg. demand Tupac get an AIDS test during the making of Poetic Justice and lets not forget her role in Grannygate in 2010) but she didn't deserve to be made into a Pariah.
 
Last edited:
Goddess4Real;4210513 said:
Of course Janet planned it (she did a similar thing in at back during the 1990 MTV Awards) Here is a reminder of that performance.....

[video=youtube;jtYBNA6N17c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtYBNA6N17c[/video]

However, Justin also knew about it, happily participated and initially boasted about it until the backlash set in.

<blockquote class="twitter-video" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Seemed pretty geeked to me. Not a bit of "I don't deserve this kind of publicity" "I was appalled" you tried it you ugly snake <a href="https://twitter.com/jtimberlake?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jtimberlake</a> <a href="https://t.co/QtWEGnV3ED">pic.twitter.com/QtWEGnV3ED</a></p>&#8212; moonchild &#2384; (@mzshannon) <a href="https://twitter.com/mzshannon/status/922335537469550598?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


IMO they are BOTH at fault. The reason why a lot of people are still upset today, is because of how Janet was treated afterwards......like a piece of dog shit, while Justin threw her under the bus and got rewarded for it, because WHITE MALE PRIVILEGE. Sure Janet has done some dodgy things (eg. demand Tupac get an AIDS test during the making of Poetic Justice and lets not forget her role in Grannygate in 2010) but she didn't deserve to be made into a Pariah.
Click to expand...

Of course, they are both at fault. It was Janet's idea and plan. Justin helped her implement that plan. Of course, Janet and even Justin didn't think that the reaction would be what it was. He apologized. It took Janet longer to apologize; although she was the one who had the bra DESIGNED to tear away and expose her naked nipple? The designer spoke on Entertainment Tonight and said the outfit was designed so that the bra was attached to the top that Janet wore. It was designed so that when Justin ripped it off, the bra would come off also, and expose her nipple ornament. Janet anticipated that the media would love her stunt and be cheering her for her boldness. The same media that kissed her butt and pitted her against her brother, turned against her. I don't blame Justin for what the media and industry did to Janet. Did people expect him to just sit back and give up his career because this STUNT, not a wardrobe malfunction, backfired? The backlash was overblown; however, Justin is not the reason for the backlash, the media and public are.

Btw, when did Justin throw Janet under the bus and treat her like "dog shit"? Maybe I missed something? I've never seen an interview where he talked bad about Janet.
 
Btw, when did Justin throw Janet under the bus and treat her like "dog shit"? Maybe I missed something? I've never seen an interview where he talked bad about Janet.
Click to expand...

Nope I think I just didn't express it more clearly......what I meant was it was the media hypocrisy who treated her like "dog shit" after the Superbowl fallout, and yes there were other sketchier factors about gender, race, subjugation that was at play as well. But, it would have been nice for Justin to defend Janet more at the time, rather instead of taking a swipe at her (and Prince) on a song called Give It To Me referring to Jackson&#8217;s appearance on Oprah Winfrey&#8217;s show in 2006 &#8220;Could you speak up and stop mumbling?/I don&#8217;t think you came in clear/When you&#8217;re sitting on the top/it&#8217;s hard to hear you from way up there/I saw you tryin&#8217; to act cute on TV/Just let me clear the air/We missed you on the charts last week/[Bleep] that&#8217;s right, you wasn&#8217;t there.&#8221;

U say sexy never left then why is everybody on my shit/Don't hate on me just because you didn't come up with it. http://www.contactmusic.com/prince/news/prince-takes-a-swipe-at-timberlake_1006822


[video=youtube;RgoiSJ23cSc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgoiSJ23cSc[/video]

To be fair Justin did regret not defending Janet (a friend who helped him out when he was a member of N'sync and as a solo artist) at the time in the EW article in 2009 http://ew.com/article/2009/12/04/justin-timberlake-entertainer-decade/ I just wished it didn't take 5 years later, it would have made a lot of difference.


 
Last edited:
by Yashar Ali September 6, 2018 Huffington Post
5b919bd7200000430034c26b.jpeg

One thing that allies and critics of Les Moonves, the CEO and chairman of CBS, agree on is that he tends to remember who his enemies are, and exact revenge on them on his terms. From actors to entertainment lawyers, people who ended up on the wrong side of Moonves would often become his target for years after they upset him.

Although Moonves is embattled and likely to be ousted from CBS amid sexual harassment allegations (reportedly with a significant severance payment) following an investigation by The New Yorker, many women and men whom I contacted about Moonves’ conduct were reluctant to speak to me, even when I told them they could speak off the record.

One target of Moonves’ ire and vengefulness, according to multiple sources, was Janet Jackson.

Jackson became a years-long fixation for Moonves after the so-called “wardrobe malfunction” of 2004, when her breast was exposed for nine-sixteenths of a second after Justin Timberlake tore a piece of fabric off her bustier during their Super Bowl halftime performance. CBS and MTV (a subsidiary of Viacom, the parent company of CBS at the time), which produced the halftime show, faced a torrent of criticism and a $550,000 Federal Communications Commission fine.

Jackson and Timberlake both said the incident was truly a malfunction &#8213; that Timberlake was only meant to rip away the leather on Jackson’s bustier to reveal red lace, but instead ripped away everything, leaving her breast exposed to over 100 million Super Bowl fans.

Moonves, however, was convinced it wasn’t a malfunction, but rather an intentional bid to stir up controversy. Moonves has been open about the fact that the incident caused him embarrassment, and he told sources who spoke to me that Jackson, in his mind, was not sufficiently repentant.
5b91db272000002d0a37b7dc.jpeg

Moonves is seen in Beverly Hills, California, in May 2017


Moonves banned Jackson and Timberlake from the 2004 Grammys broadcast airing on CBS the week after the Super Bowl. But Timberlake was allowed to perform after he tearfully apologized for the incident, according to conversations Moonves had with my sources.

The CBS chief executive, according to sources who spoke to me, was furious that Jackson didn’t make a similarly contrite apology to him. The fallout from the incident inflicted significant damage on Jackson’s career &#8213; which until that point had produced 10 No. 1 hits &#8213; and still reverberates to this day.

Moonves ordered Viacom properties VH1 and MTV, and all Viacom-owned radio stations, to stop playing Jackson’s songs and music videos. The move had a huge impact on sales of her album “Damita Jo,” which was released in March 2004, just a month after the Super Bowl.

A major point of controversy, particularly among Jackson’s black fans, was that the reaction to the wardrobe malfunction fell solely on Jackson’s shoulders, even though Timberlake was the one who actually pulled off the fabric to reveal her breast. While Jackson’s career was significantly damaged, Timberlake’s flourished. CBS insiders who spoke to me felt strongly that Moonves played a large part in how Jackson was perceived by the public.

A spokesperson for CBS declined to comment for this story.

Seven years after the 2004 incident, Moonves told several sources he was furious when he found out Jackson had signed a book deal with Simon & Schuster for her book True You: A Journey to Finding and Loving Yourself. Simon & Schuster is owned by the CBS Corporation.

“How the **** did she slip through?” Moonves asked while recounting the story to a source who spoke to me. He told another source that heads were going to roll as a result of the deal.

It’s not clear whether Moonves ever actually took action against anyone who gave Jackson the book deal, but his tone when he spoke about Jackson was so aggressive, one source said they couldn’t speak to me on the record because “I’m not interested in having that man following me to the grave and trying to screw me over the whole time.”
 
Is Janet actually crying about the superbowl incident in 2022? That superbowl incident was a planned spot. Janet fans need to stop making it seem like it was some accident. Janet knew about it and the fact is that it backfired on her. Yes, she was treated unfairly compared to Timberlake, but I doubt that it was the main reason behind her decline as a mainstream artist.

The fact is in 2004, Janet was 37-38 and had been in the music industry for over 20 years. Most artists tend to decline in popularity in their 30s and that is reflected in their music sales. Janet just had a natural age related decline of which the signs were there during the All For You album, which didn't perform as well as her previous four albums. And she didn't make things easier for her by releasing two absolutely terrible albums in Damita Joe and 20 YO in 2004 & 2006. That certainty didn't help her after the superbowl stunt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top