Was a federal court right to toss the fine over Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction?

RealTalk Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 03:47 AM EST

oh jeez its just a titty
what if all the cows went extinct what would people rely on for milk?
TITTYS

Sosi Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 07:41 PM EST

I understand the decision, why make CBS pay for Janets mistake?

Mike Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 09:31 AM EST

Janet has paid dearly for this. (Justin didn't) Now maybe American radio will give Janet a chance again....

Sosi Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 01:48 AM EST

Sal, she said she planned for the black part to come off and not the red part. So yes it was planned to an extent. And even THAT extent is not acceptable for children to see. You should watch David Lettermans interview with her after the incident. Question for you Sal ..did she repent? As I remember while talking to Diane Swayer she refused to change. And thats apart of why the backlash was so hard on her. Another reason was bcos it was HER idea.

ardy Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 07:01 PM EST

Is it titillating to show off a sack of silicone covered with skin or just plain farcical? How can you be fined for such parody?

Anthony Garcia Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:12 AM EST

Haven't we wasted enough time and taxpayer money on Janet Jackson's breast?

Jackie E. Bowser Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 09:35 AM EST

Please let it be. She is a wonderful artist.. we love her.. she is only human.... Let it go... We all love JANET JACKSON...

Kishi Martin Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 08:22 AM EST

It's taken 4 years to remove it, but imagine the hype and fuss created over it. Can we take that back? For 4 years, we watched Janet Jackson be ripped apart publicly, receive no airplay, and her albums suffer due to no support from the media. While Justin Timberlake is treated like a saint and remains unaffected. Never before has a public incident like this been treated so unfairly and one-sided.

EW has a continuous negative bias towards Miss Jackson. As a subscribed member, this entire year EW has managed to ridicule and insult Miss Jackson in every article written about her. What gives? It's ENTERTAINMENT Weekly, Janet has been a musician for 26 years. All her musical achievements were put to the side just because of a boob. Is EW part of Viacom or the FCC? Then cancel my subscription. I'm going to listen to the "Damita Jo" album. :)

Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 04:15 AM EST

Sanity - 1 / Lunatics - 0
This wasted a lot of taxpayer money for nothing. Open letter to the insane Bible Thumpers: I'm tired of you shoving your Puritanically insane crap down my throat. Worried about what the kiddies will see on TV? Hey, I have an idea: Get your fat-assed kids away from the TV and outside playing, where they belong -- and join them -- so I can watch my boobs, penises, wild sex, murders and deliciously foul language in peace. Oh yeah, and try having sex with the lights on sometime and more than once a month. You'll throw that Bible right out the window in no time. Separation of church and state. Look it up. It's the law of the land.

Sal Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:06 AM EST

"Her PLANNED performance." Sosi was it a planned performance? You don't know. This was maybe an accident and God forgives if you repent even thought it is an accident. As I know, she did not planned to do this act through national tv.

LB Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:02 PM EST

This is an EW article??? Wow by the hatred of the last sentence I thought I was reading a bad blog. (a really bad blog) Anywho...this is so long over due - it was SO blown out of porportion. If it was SO shocking then why did every nightly news in middle america show it in slow motion. If you watched it live it happend so fast you missed it! And Justin, dont get me started on this coward. Its always "JANET" and no mention of him. I guess thats why he hosted the ESPY awards this year mocking the whole situation because he wasnt the one who had a part of his clothing torn off in front of millions of people. HE was the victim obviously - Right! Janet was the VILLIAN! I wonder how the outcome would have been if it was say Jessica Simpson and 50 Cent on the stage. Im sure America would be FURIOUS with Jessica for PLANNING to show her breast. 50 Cent would be so innocent. We would feel sorry for him and it would be Jessica who was the whore and the villian then right?!

AnthonyRaggs Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 08:33 PM EST

Yes, I agree with Leroy Brown. Janet Jackson suffered 99% of the blame while Justin Timberfake kept his mouth shut. He did not have the testicular fortitude to man-up and admit his part in nipple-gate ordeal. Besides the Super Bowl have had many sexual jokes and overtones that the FCC should have cited and fine. Lastly, if men can show their breasts in public and on television, why are we discriminating against Janet?

Sosi Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 07:29 PM EST

Think of what happened happening at World Youth Day infront of the Pope and everyone, think of it happening in a church, in Gods House. Exactly as it happened. Her PLANNED performance. Everyone could overlook a minor unintended event but she planned for him to rip off her clothes to reveal her red bra, THAT was INTENDED and THAT is UNAPPROPRIATE. Now if your so use to seeing things like that then you have become immuned but not all of us have thank God. Even what she INTENDED was UNAPPROPRIATE let alone the accident that unfolded. Many of us dont want our kids watching men treat women that way so it RIGHTFULLY was and is a (((BIG))) deal. She has a sexual obsession and needs help, loving good and true help. This is what happens when your fav artist and brother tease you all your life about your body. You end up trying to get the world to "desire" you so you will feel better when in fact it only brings more misery. I hope God Himself helps her find TRUE and lasting happiness. God bless.

raft3r Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 05:56 PM EST

janet is an icon.
she deserves a lot more respect than what she gets these past few years.
let it go, people.

Bob Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 04:52 PM EST

It's about time. And by the way, why do we always have people who need to add in negative comments about individuals when they are doing news articles? Was that author's last comment in the article really necessary. If yoou ask me, that is the kind of idicy that needs to be followed and eliminated. Essentially, Adam Markovitz, keep your biased comments to your damn self.

Raven_Moon Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 04:08 PM EST

I agree with the decision to toss is out. The FCC is a bit ridiculous sometimes. (most of the time?) Can we move on now?

TROY Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 03:48 PM EST

THERE IS SO MUCH ON TELEVISION THAT COULD BE CENSORED AND FINED BY THE FCC---ALL TV SHOWS THAT DEPICT GRAPHIC MURDERS, CHILD NEGLECT, ABUSE OF WOMEN AND ALL NIGHTLY NEWS BROADCASTS---THAT IF THIS WAS MADE A STAPLE THAT WHEN WE TURN ON TELEVISION, THEN IT WOULD BE BLANK. THE FCC BROADCAST HOW MANY CPMPLAINTS IT RECEIVED, BUT DID NOT BROADCAST HOW MANY COMPLAINTS IT GOT ON ITSELF TELLING IT TO "GROW UP." ACCIDENTS HAPPEN AND I IN FACT THINK THAT THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT.I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH THE JUDGES AND PROUD OF THEIR DECISION. I HATE THE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY TRY TO DEFINE WHAT IS DECENT AND INDECENT ACCORDING TO THEIR MORALS. TO ALL YOU PEOPLE "SHUT UP AND DRIVE" OR FLY TO ANOTHER COUNTRY.

queen of disrepair Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 03:38 PM EST

But what shiny nipple object will the media focus on now so that we don't have to pay attention to real news? Oh, wait...Sean Preston Federline is playing with mommy's lighter and pack of Marlboros. Thank God..I was afraid I would have to start learning how to focus.

Andrea Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 02:43 PM EST

Hey, this reminds me...did they ever settle that complaint earlier this year over Charlotte Ross's 2003 butt shot on NYPD Blue? Yeah, that was a real winner. It only took five years for the FCC to try to get in on THAT cash grab.

elly Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:59 PM EST

while i believe the fcc does have a place and a useful role to play, i'm glad this is over. fining someone for an unintentional act just made everyone look ridiculous. fining for anything during a live broadcast is ridiculous...unless, of course, the network's hired kathy griffin or sarah silverman for a live show. then they're just asking for it.

RedAngel Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:43 PM EST

I'm in the "just a boob" camp as well...but if they really wanted to go after someone, they should've gone after the news outlets. I was watching the show, and no one in my house even really noticed. In all the media coverage after, though, I saw replay after replay (some in slow motion and zoomed in)..."So digusting and horrific...Let's see it again!"

JoeC Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:41 PM EST

The ironic thing is, if this show had just been on MTV, no one would have cared. But because it was during Middle America's real national hoilday, the Super Bowl, that's what got certain people so ticked off. Mind you, there were plenty of commercials that day for Viagra and plenty of products in that nature and warnings about erections that may last too long. But that's okay, right? But let Janet's boob be seen for two seconds, oh noooooooooooooooo! What hypocrisy!

bud Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:09 PM EST

HooRay!! Now they can pass the fine on to all those crime/murder/stab/bloody crime shows that CBS produces. That is what is really offensive.

Valerie Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM EST

Really really happy they tossed the fine. I am completely in the "just a boob" camp and I think the only lasting damage this episode has brought us (apart from the unfortunate "wardrobe malfunction") is that is make us look like prudes and hypocrites to the rest of the world. Maybe this will help a little.

Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:57 AM EST

Can we lay off the Caps Lock key, everyone? You don't need to shout to make a rational point. And if you have a good point, all caps makes it look like you are a raving loony, and does your position no favors. So learn how to spell, punctuate, and speak rationally if you want to be taken seriously. That goes for everyone, no matter their color, sexual orientation, creed, or politics. Let's keep our discourse rational and maybe, just maybe, change and progress can occur. Thanks.

Brad F Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:51 AM EST

Yes, You're right, it was just a boob. First, Janet was not fined, CBS was fined for airing it. Second, it has nothing to do with whether or not we accept it socially. It lies entirely in what our laws of decency are. If you did not agree with the fine, you should have lobbied to have the decency laws relaxed. I am disgusted and abhorred by many things I see broadcasted. Not because I don't find such humor enjoyable, but because it steps over the lines we've set as a community for broadcasting. There are venues for such displays. Public TV airwaves are not one of them.

I feel the fine should have remained. CBS/MTV/NFL orchestrated and aired the event. If Janet/Justin did it without the knowledge of CBS/MTV/NFL, it still falls on the judgment of CBS/MTV/NFL to air Janet/Justin live if they could not be decent while doing such.

Leroy Brown Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:45 AM EST

Snarf, what you tring to sey? U think that i am on that "PPP"??

nerd Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:21 AM EST

@owlafaye
I agree...breasts should be kept away from all children, especially those breast feeding! We wouldn't want children getting the wrong idea, like breasts are part of the human body, or that they're product of nature or somthing strange like that. I say ban all breasts! Ban 'em today! Male, female, animal...kids don't need to see that kinda thing. And what about those heathens in Europe...there they even wear thong bikinis!!! The nerve!!!!!!

Snarf Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:12 AM EST

Much ado about nothing. Although in related news guess the woman who was suing for being traumatized by the whole non-affair is SOL.

Yes yes Leroy "everyone" is out to get Janet because she's black. Now do us all a favour and lay off the rock, mmmkay?

Leroy Brown Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:03 AM EST

RACISM HAD EVERY 9TH SPLIT OF A SECOND TO DO WITH IT. I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU SAY. THE DEVIL IS A LIAR, IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OF HER SKIN.

ah Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:02 AM EST

The argument the court made was interesting. They basically said that the FCC for years would have considered the act "fleeting" and would not have fined the network for it. Soon after, the FCC's rules changed but those rules were not in effect at the time of the Superbowl. As a result the court said it was arbitrary and capricious to fine the network. Incidently, the reason the rules were changed about a month after the Superbowl was actually a result of Bono using the F-word on the Golden Globes. The court did not say that this new rule was wrong which means that if Nipplegate had taken place in April 2004, the fine might stand. The only complicating factor is that Jackson and Timberlake were deemed "indendent contractors" so who knows if CBS would have been deemed liable.

Leroy Brown Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:59 AM EST

RACISM HAD EVERY 9TH SPLIT OF THE SECOND TO DO WITH IT. SHE RECEIVED ALL OF THIS DAMAGE BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OF HER SKIN, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU SAY, THE DEVIL IS A LIAR, IT IS BECAUSE JANET JACKSON IS BLACK!!!

To Leroy Brown Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:38 AM EST

Racism had nothing to do with it

owlafaye Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:37 AM EST

We spent $458 million dollars setting up trauma centers for the children that suffered from this outrage. Breasts should be kept away from all children by ANY means. Queen Victoria is just rolling in that oversized coffin.

Jimmie Brown Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:34 AM EST

I cannot believe after all these years - that the FCC is fining the network !!! COME ON PEOPLE - it was ONLY A BOOB - for gawd sakes !!!! People BE MORE concerned about HOW the STAR athletes ARE affecting YOUR KIDS !!!!! WHY would you want them to be your kids role models ???

I watched the show - and you were NOT able to see that much anyway - but come on - its A BOOB !!!! NOTHING to be ashamed of...

I am a Grandmother of 5 - and DID NOT THINK a thing of it .... IF your kids have been tramatized over this - ITS ON YOU !!!!!!! IS anyone jealous about Janet's boob ??? Cause she is GORGEOUS !!! GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE PEOPLE !!!

perplexed Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:33 AM EST

What I saw was Timberlake 'rip' Jackson's clothes...and SHE was blamed?? Not one word against him! What hypocracy! Thank goodness they came to their senses and tossed out the fine.

rickker Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:28 AM EST

hey. nipples, we ALL have them. even the fools at the FCC. i can't believe people are still making an issue out of this.

suntrap Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:26 AM EST

To L.J. Rhodes - I couldn't agree with you more. While I'm not sure I'd go topless in public, I'd sure like the option! It gets mightly hot in Texas in the summer.

Sandra Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:20 AM EST

LJ Rhodes, you rock.

L.J. Rhodes Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:05 AM EST

Why on Earth do we still get upset about seeing women's breasts, period? Is it just me, or does forbidding women to go topless in public violate the fourteenth amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law?

Men are allowed by law to be topless in public, on network television, etc. Yet women aren't. Clearly a violation of equal protection laws.

And to those who would say that women can't show their breasts because they're a sexual organ, I say bunk. Breasts are no more a sexual organ than one's ears, feet and other erogenous zones. Reproductive organs are the only thing that both genders are required to keep covered. Breasts aren't reproductive organs. They're supportive organs for an already-produced offspring. But then, so are arms, laps and car seats.

Let's ban those from being shown in public and on broadcast networks, too, why don't we?

Cassie Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:05 AM EST

"CONCERNED CITIZEN", U TELLING A DAMN LIE, U DID NOT EVEN SEE HER BREAST THAT CLOSELY, YOU MUST BE ONE OF THOSE DRUNK PARENTS. GET OVER IT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN THROWN OUT, I BET YOUR BREAST LOOKS LIKE A FIVE DAY OLD DEAD BODY!!!

concerned citizen Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:03 AM EST

her boob was nasty and that is why the fine should stay.

Leroy Brown Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:00 AM EST

IT IS BECAUSE SHE WAS A BLACK FEMALE, THIS IS WHY IT WAS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT. JUSTIN TIMBERPUNK NEVER RECEIVED ANY CRITISM ABOUT THE SITUATION IT WAS ALL ON JANET JACKSON. MADONNA KISSED BRITNEY SPEARS IN FRONT OF MILLION OF CHILDREN ON THE AWARDS SHOW I DID NOT SEE THE FCC TRYING TO SUE THAT STATION ABOUT IT, PARENTS DID NOT MAKE A FUSS ABOUT IT. AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP, ALL THIS RACISM NEEDS TO GO. IF JANET JACKSON HAD BEEN CELINE DION AND SHOWED HER BREAST THE MEDIA WOULD HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SWEEP IT UNDER THE CARPET. PEOPLE IT IS BECAUSE JANET JACKSON IS A BLACK, STRONG, FEMALE, THAT IS WHY THEY TRIED TO BRING HER DOWN AND SHE IS A JACKSON, MICHAEL'S SISTER!!!

NineDaves.com Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:00 AM EST

yes. the best decision ever. finally, we can hopefully put "nipplegate 04" to end!

styles-p Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:00 AM EST

IT WAS AN ACCIDENT! ARE PEOPLE FREAKIN KIDDIN ME? just two days after this incident, I saw a very popular tv show that when it came on, a woman was lying on her stomach while some man was behind her make grunt noises. Yes it was supposed to be a man giving the woman anal sex. ON THE SAME CHANEL. But no-one said anything about that! And why is it,'the janet jackson wardrobe malfunction.' If fingers are going to be pointed, how come no one's saying anything about Justin- HE PULLED THE DARNED THING OFF! Not to mention why aren't these people who are complaining saying anything about the crap thats on tv nowadays? TV has gotten way worst than accidental boob flash from many shows and no one is saying anything about that.

Emily Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:54 AM EST

As long as we have to explain to children what Cialis, Viagra, erectile disfunction, genital herpes, trojans, and KY Intrigue are, (all of these commercials air during those events which kids may be watching) then What Is The Point of getting all upset over a split second of boob???

Cassie Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:53 AM EST

IM AM GLAD THEY THREW IT OUT BECAUSE MOST OF THE PARENTS WHO WAS WATCHING THE SUPERBOWL WAS VERY DRUNK IN FRONT OF THEIR CHILDREN, AND I GUESS THATS IS OK. JANET JACKSON IS A LEGEND WHO WROTE ABOUT BIGOTRY, KNOWLEDGE, RACISM, EDUCATION AND I WAS A COLLEGE DROP OUT AFTER LISTENING TO THIS ALBUM I RETURNED TO COLLEGE AND TODAY I AM WORKING ON MY PHD BECAUSE OF JANET JACKSON, SHE REALLY TOUCHED MY LIFE NO OTHER ARTIST HAS WRITTEN ABOUT LIFE SITUATIONS THAT CAN REALLY REACH YOUR HEART THE WAY THAT JANET DID ON HER RHYTHM NATION ALBUM. SHE IS AN ICON AND LEGEND. I TRUELY LOVE HER FOR HELPING ME TO GO BACK TO COLLEGE.

Susan Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:53 AM EST

Oh fer cryin out loud...it was a boob. I have to look at my own everytime I get out of the shower and I don't fine myself! Get over it.

Chief Orji Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:52 AM EST

Great decision! Our America has become the only country where saying that you are "male" or "female" might earn you 10 year jail terms because those words suggest that you have some sexual appendage. Funny how artificial we have degenerated. In our America, everyday expression and curses have sexual connotations, sexualism defines our dressing, our quests, our essence; however, we do not want it on TV. Talk about hypocrisy? Maybe a ray of light if the courts would keep telling us how to accept that we are just what we are - humans, not robots!

Rasha Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:51 AM EST

The fallout from that entire debacle made me so angry. I’m definitely in the “It’s just a boob” camp as well, because, well it’s just a boob. The problem were the few people complaining actually drew so much more attention to it by shrieking and howling about the purity of their children watching. For weeks, you couldn’t escape coverage of it. And while it was so offensive, it’s apparently perfectly fine to air it on broadcast television in the middle of the day as long as there is a black bar over the boob. So my 5-year-old niece who missed the originally airing only to started to ask questions when she saw the event on covers of magazines and on the news in the following months.

I think both of them deserve an apology from the trigger-happy FCC, and then they can pay closer to those OMFG ads for Gossip Girl, which I find d much more sexually suggestive, especially given their target demographic.

Relax Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:47 AM EST

I agree, it was just a boob. It happened so fast that I really wasn't sure what I saw. But, the media made sure we all knew for sure by the next day what we had witnessed. But, if it was an accident, why was she already wearing a nipple ornament? How many guys clicked the link to this story because they wanted another peek at a breast? Come on, it was just a boob. :)

James Beckman Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:41 AM EST

It happenned so fast I dont believe anyone was shocked,I wa s watching and did not see any skin, So I do not see what the big hallabaloo is for something that was only visibkle for a fraction of a second..

Marcus Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:40 AM EST

One of the major problems with this country is somewhere along the way we've merged freedom with the idea that we have a right to not be offended. This "right", which is most assuredly NOT a right but a preference, is of course an impossible attainment as everyone has opinions. As such, we've resulted in reducing our public interactions to the lowest common denominator that wouldn't "offend" someone, culminating in public discussions about nothing that could be construed as useful, and our public's obsession with the meaningless. It is without doubt a tyranny of the majority by the Politically correct pundits.

It is if for no other reason, complete and utter bullshit.

In these times of economic and political failure, it is most comforting to know that the Federal courts still have a solid head on their shoulders.

Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:36 AM EST

Err, you didn't just see a nipple slip - what you saw was a man tearing a piece if clothing off a woman's breast.

That's OK for you???????

Ernie Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:34 AM EST

Personally I've never understood why nudity is supposed to be horrifying, but if some people find it so then I suppose the public media needs to control it. However there are slip ups in any endeavor and people don't go off the deep end over it unless it is related to sex. That just seems to drive some types inasane(er.)

Green Gummi Bear Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:29 AM EST

I'm in the just a boob camp as well, but what I really wanted was for MTV to get slapped (I think they're the ones who put all that together). While not a parent, I do think that the persistant nature of that channel and other "Entertainment" productions to get more and more Girls Gone Wild, Paris Hilton, etc. over real substance is just not acceptable. It should have been about the entertainment and music, not about shock value, "suprise, here's a boob!" It's just a boob, but quit trying to up the ante that it's now all about the boobs (The Hills, Real World, etc.)

Heleno Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 09:07 AM EST

Good decision. The sort of person who could genuinely suffer distress / moral outrage / psychological damage at the fleeting glimpse of a breast is, I suspect, pretty seriously damaged to begin with.

What worries me more is how everyone continues to blame the incident on Jackson. It takes two (in this case) to rip a top off.

Coach's Mistress Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 08:03 AM EST

Tossing the fine was the absolute right thing to do. I agree that it was "just a boob" and it happend so darn fast that most people watching it live had no idea what had even happened.
What does alarm me is the amount of cursing on network TV. As a parent of elementary-school aged kids, I don't agree with many of the words that are allowed (even though I use them myself in adult company). And there tends to be so much "bleeping" on TV. When I noticed my 9-year-old can read lips despite the bleeps in Hell's Kitchen, well there was another fun show I thought the family could watch together.