After digesting various news reports, accusations, denials, and doing some investigation on the internet, some of which didn't involve pictures of boobies, I have made a life altering decision. At the risk of being considered naive, I have concluded that Janet Jackson DID NOT intentionally reveal her nipple-shielded breast during last Sunday's Super Bowl halftime show.
Now you might be under the impression that she has already admitted to baring all (well half) on purpose, but she has said no such thing. Contrary to some news reports which are desperately trying to lead you to believe that the exposure was intentional, Miss Jackson is still sticking to her story that she was only going to reveal a red lace bra, not an entire breast. I buy the explanation that there was a "wardrobe malfunction."
Of course even had the stunt in which Justin Timberlake ripped off Jackson's top, gone according to plan, it would hardly have been a proud moment in football history. But if Timberlake had successfully managed to unleash the red lace bra, instead of giving the world a surgically enhanced peep-show, there certainly wouldn't have been the media firestorm or FCC investigation into the sleazy halftime production.
The case supporting the theory that the exposure of an entire boob was premeditated consists of :
A January 28 story on MTV's website promising "shocking moments" during Jackson's performance.
Her halftime show coincided with the release of her album DAMITO JO, which could really use a publicity boost.
The song she and Justin Timberlake were singing, "Rock Your Body" ended with the line "Gonna have you naked by the end of this song" at which time Timerlake reached over and ripped away the leather cup covering her breast.
CBS had her on screen at a perfect angle at the perfect time to catch the incident, which obviously means they must have known what was coming.
Jackson was wearing a nipple-shield which would not have been necessary had she not been intending to show off her entire breast.
If MTV claims that it had no knowledge of the "reveal" what "shocking moments" were they expecting? Who knows? Sounds like hype, and if they REALLY knew of a breast exposure, they probably would have referred to a "shocking moment" -- singular. MTV has added an editor's note to the story which states that they thought the "shock" was going to be the appearance of Justin Timberlake.
Publicity boost? C'mon! Performing for 100 million people isn't enough publicity? The Madonna/Britney kiss didn't translate into any net positive publicity for them, so it's hard to imagine how exposing a nipple would seem like a risk worth taking.
Yes, Justin sang "Gonna have you naked by the end of this song" just before the exposure -- the intended revealing of Jackson's red lace bra (which can be seen beneath her black rubber suit.) I'm sure the virtual stripping of Jackson would have had been a big enough surprise. Not only was a breast exposure not necessary, Jackson and Timerlake knew full well that their performance was going out to millions of homes, and over 100 countries including (emerging market) China on a Sunday afternoon. Seeing as the whole halftime show was overtly sexual, I can easily see how Jackson might have decided at the last minute to make sure she was the biggest bang of the production, after all, she was the headliner and nobody (Jessica Simpson) better upstage the headliner. Not only would exposing her brassiere have been sufficient, in fact, given Janet's jet black costume and her darker than not skin color, the bright red lace bra would undoubtedly have been more visually stimulating than what we actually saw.
Of course CBS had Jackson on screen at the perfect time to catch the reveal. The "event" occured at the end of the last song of the show, which would be the logical time to have the main act front and center.
Why would a nipple-shield be needed if Janet Jackson wasn't planning on exposing her entire breast? Well for one thing, unlike myself or my wife, I can actually imagine Janet Jackson waking up in the morning and saying "What nipple-shield should I wear today." Besides, a close-up of the exposed breast, as seen on The Drudge Report shows that the shield didn't fully cover the nipple area. If the breast exposure had been planned, it would seem more likely that Jackson would have been wearing a shield that covered the entire strategic area. Heck, if it had been planned, you'd think she would have exposed both breasts.
Jackson's reaction immediately after the exposure, before she could possibly know that angry parents were ringing CBS phones off the hook, has her looking angry as she covers herself up which strikes me as a normal reaction. If it had been planned like that, she no doubt would have been trying to appear to be laughing it off (being the consummate performer,) rather than ending her show on such an obviously negative note.
I feel sorry for Janet Jackson, although I'm sure she'll recover. Now newspaper editorialists and radio talk show hosts are going on about the "violent" symbolism of a man ripping off a woman's clothes, even though the act as planned was no more anti-woman than the music video probably being shown on MTV right now.
In retrospect, the stunt was ill advised and obviously under-rehearsed, but had it worked, just imagine it. Music pounding, Janet and Justin girating around, then the line "Gonna have you naked by the end of this song" as Justin reaches over and rips off Janet's top to reveal the sexy red bra. There still might have been some complaints, but the crowd would have gone wild, and the Jackson/Timberlake performance would have been hailed as "sensual and powerful."
