This post brought to you by a French test tomorrow morning, DayQuil, the SuperBowl, and work.

[aruan]

This office is a graveyard. There are only two copy editors here, and I'm the only one night editing. I'm thinking oogobs of AP stories and apologies in advance for the extraneous commas with regard to tomorrow's issue.

Also, Cameron isn't working tonight! Where's my happy, brainy, funny editor-in-chief? Laura, the managing editor is here, but even she's not half as much fun without him.

On another note, why did Janet even do the halftime show? She doesn't have anything to promote, right? What I'm snickering over is the possibility that they got her for Justin, or that Justin listed her as a clause in his performance contract. Teehee. *is twelve*

Quote of the Night:

"If I ever find out I only have 24 hours to live, I think I'm going to spend it playing football. That way it'll last at least a month."
-dacey

P.S. "I just want to get drunk, curl up in bed, and sleep."
-Brandy, copy editor

Amen to that. *kicks sniffles* I feel so last season.

P.P.S. Bwah! There's already a press release that came across the AP wires from CBS apologizing for the SuperBowl boob-flashing incident. So, apparently, not intended. What I love is Justin's face in the pictures, once he realizes he grabbed too much, the tactful averting of his eyes but too much in shock to actually react. Heh.

Comments

Re:

[vivamexico.livejournal.com]

I've seen some articles on her new album on MTV.com, but other than I haven't heard anything about it. Janet was actually supposed to be the halftime headliner in 2002, but after 9/11 the organizers decided it would be more appropriate to have a somber halftime show. That's why U2 ultimately performed that year. I don't know if that's why she got to perform this year or not though.

Re:

[gjstruthseeker.livejournal.com]

I doubt that last year's events had much to do with it (unless her album was supposed to come out a year ago, too.) Whatever, yo. I'm mostly entirely underwhelmed by her, have the same objections to lip synching as everyone else, and thought the stunt was pretty lame.

I took advertising last semester, and one of the tenets is to build product recognition, of course, but another is to build a brand identity and preserve it. This whole mess may make Janet's stock soar for a bit, but it's definitely cheapening in the end, both to her and Justin's newfound credibility within the music industry. However, their short-term goals have certainly been accomplished. *shrug* Who's to say? Maybe it was everything they (whoever is responsible) intended. Personally, I'm moving on with my life.

Re:

[vivamexico.livejournal.com]

She wasn't supposed to perform last year, though. Last year Shania Twain, No Doubt, and...other people performed at halftime. It was the year before that, the first Superbowl after 9/11, that Janet was originally scheduled for. At the time, she had a new album out.

I'm with you on the "moving on" part. I wasn't online yesterday until late at night, so I was surprised by all the hoopla over the boob stunt. I think there's a cheapening effect happening all over popular entertainment right now, and this stunt was just the latest in a sad trend. I'm not sure what's worse, the actual stunt or the predictable media explosion proceeding it.

Re:

[gjstruthseeker.livejournal.com]

Okay, gotcha. I was thrown by the fact that I still think it's 2003 and the 2001 Bowl is played in 2002, so it was only a year apart in my head, not that I remember Janet's album either way.

I think there's a cheapening effect happening all over popular entertainment right now, and this stunt was just the latest in a sad trend.

Exactly. The whole Britney/Madonna thing, but even before that, the whole Tatu thing and the ever-escalating hemlines and plunging necklines - it's the entertainment industry expoiting a very Puritanical culture that still pledges abstinence and pays its female workforce substantially less than its men. People in general society are afraid of sex, and strong women, and I think the entertainment industry could do a lot to change that but is instead relying on cheapening shock tactics to gain publicity. Sex sells, it does, but it doesn't have to be degrading to the, err, merchandise? That came out wrong, but you know what I mean.

I'm not sure what's worse, the actual stunt or the predictable media explosion proceeding it.

Indeed. They know what will make headlines - famous people doing taboo things, as tacky and fabricated as it might be. Celebrity-obsessed and sexually repressed is a bad combination, but one the entertainment industry has learned to exploit.