Nipplegate 2004.

As American boys were creating 4.5 million orphans in a foreign war fought on a pretext shown to be a lie, American mothers lost their minds when Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's breast for half a second during the Superbowl halftime.

The FCC received 511 complaints in 2001. In 2004, nearly 1.5 million complaints triggered by Nipplegate forced the FCC to bring the all-powerful broadcasting industry to heel, handing out record fines and ensuring ongoing censorship of 'offensive material' that continues today.

The National Coalition on Television Violence estimates that an American child will witness 8,000 murders and 100,000 acts of violence on television by the time they finish elementary school. But an exposed female nipple...

"It's just not safe for children anymore."

Either you forgot the sarcasm tag, or you're one of the people who think that seeing Janet Jackson's nipple for 3/4 of a second can "scar someone for life".

People have peepees or hoohoos. I figure that knowing that they exist (and knowing the proper words for them) isn't a bad thing in any way no matter how old you are.

Hate to break this to you but @shatterdrose seems to have read his Marx while you seem to have watched too much FOX.

A 'Government' WILL ALWAYS EXIST in EVERY HUMAN SOCIETY and WILL CONSIST OF THE POWERFUL (in modern parlance read: WEALTHY). This is true of towns in deep Africa, or nations, or in the future- planets of billions.

The idea that government is, of itself, fundamentally corrupt, or has any other predefining characteristic is a point of PHILOSOPHY and NOT THE ONE YOU ARE PUSHING.

The government is REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNED NEGOTIATING WITH THE POWERFUL.

The elimination of private property is an extreme reaction predicted by Marx and others AS A RESPONSE TO THE EVER INCREASING SHARE GOING TO THE OFFSPRING OF THE WEALTHY.

In theory, chinless entitled inheritees push the situation so much the people turn to violence to reset the system. As a comic side note, this has happened regularly and bloodily in EVERY HUMAN SOCIETY WE HAVE A RECORD OF including the relatively comfortable European countries shortly before they gave birth to the US. (In fact the Puritans on the Mayflower executed the English King for corruption and briefly ruled but upon taking power banned parties, christmas presents, janet jacksons nipples etc and were rapidly kicked out with the monarchy reinstated..)

The modern social philosophers were contemplating how to avoid repeating history over and over. And by modern I mean the 195 year old man whose ideas you are publicly struggling with.

The size of government is IRRELEVANT. Its success or failure in negotiating on your behalf with THE POWERFUL WHO OWN YOU is all you should be concerned with.

Either you are a smart young Rockerfeller-Rothschild type playing clever PR, or the sort of loudmouth whose narcissism and stupidity has sold his family into neo-feudal servitude. Either way you should really shut up.

>> ^Lann:

hehe MIA flipped off the camera @8:19


I wonder how many of the millions watching actually noticed when it happened. And now that the media has latched onto that they'll pound the THINK OF THE CHILDREN, angel into the ground. The hilarity is kids have been flipping off cameras since class pictures were invented.

As far as the show, its probably the best one since the Janet Jackson and nipple gate.

As the great philosopher Janet Jackson once reminded us, this is about Control.

All I'll add to the perceptive comments and breakdowns above is that platform control is still important. People will say that the net offers different options but apparently music acts still want to be signed and promoted. Is there more money that way in the long term? The amount of artists for whom this didn't work out suggests to me there's got to be an alternative.

Alternatives to itunes, Xbox Live, Netflix, every app store out there and who knows what else.

It's strange the more you consider when so much software is open-source, there's crowd-sourcing, all kinds of online collectives etc, that there isn't a alternative distribution hub for artists of all kinds whose work can be digitised. A place where artists and consumers get a fair deal and individuals like Louis CK don't have to set up their own infrastructure.

I don't know, maybe I'm being terribly naive but my gut feeling says there is an opportunity here. Or maybe these things exist and haven't done very well against the prevailing orthodoxy.

Congress, FCC, and Lobby groups across the nation were up in arms and shocked at Janet Jackson's nipple slip. Fines were levied, apologies made, new FCC rules put into motion.. Howard Stern and many "shock jock" dj's had more fines due to new rules after the Janet Jackson nip slip, I remember stern talking about for weeks cause of that nip slip he's got hundred thousand dollar fines.

Now where's the controversy? I swear it proves they only used the jackson slip as excuse for bigger government and more laws and fines attacking free speech in the media and now that those laws are in place them not reacting to this shows their hypocrisy

1. Yes, that poor man was shot multiple times with a lethal weapon because of the obsessiveness with danger from using weapons.

2. "The PC protection obsession is what leads to a world where kids with a plastic gun can be shot on sight." Really? Not the knowledge about the accessability of lethal guns for children? Not because a child playing with a lethal or toy- weapon for fun without malice is apparently enough reason to shoot the child in your scenario?

3."And some obsessed maniac came along an interpreted it as a threat to society." A police officer, brought up in a militaristic, gun loving culture. Who gets told he did the right thing by this society. Who is set free by this society. Who killed a human being with a gun in this society. And almost all are fine with that.

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:

>> ^DerHasisttot:
Nothing bad can come from a widespread disregard for human life and the fragility thereof

Oh, please.
Your link, if anything , proves my point, that poor man was shot partly because of the obsessiveness with danger from using weapons..
The guy was shot because, like the kids in this video, he used a "weapon" for fun, by doing something constructive with it. The PC protection obsession is what leads to a world where kids with a plastic gun can be shot on sight. He had harmless fun with his knife, just like these kids had with their waterpistols. And some obsessed maniac came along an interpreted it as a threat to society. Fuckin relax instead. live in the real world, where woodcarving, waterpistol shooting and the flashing of janet jacksons boob isn't viewed as a threat to our civilization, but for what it is: harmless fun.

>> ^DerHasisttot:
Nothing bad can come from a widespread disregard for human life and the fragility thereof


Oh, please.

Your link, if anything , proves my point, that poor man was shot partly because of the obsessiveness with danger from using weapons..

The guy was shot because, like the kids in this video, he used a "weapon" for fun, by doing something constructive with it. The PC protection obsession is what leads to a world where kids with a plastic gun can be shot on sight. He had harmless fun with his knife, just like these kids had with their waterpistols. And some obsessed maniac came along an interpreted it as a threat to society. Fuckin relax instead. live in the real world, where woodcarving, waterpistol shooting and the flashing of janet jacksons boob isn't viewed as a threat to our civilization, but for what it is: harmless fun.

> But don't let him see Janet Jackson's nipple.

That thing was unsanitary!

And yet Jeffery knows exactly what these directions mean.

But don't let him see Janet Jackson's nipple.

America. Jeesh.


>> ^deathcow:

OK, Jeffery, in this scene you start with your pistol raised, and then lower it and execution style shoot him rapidly in the head.

Satan doesn't even bother sending Avatar-quality demons...instead you get dragged into Hell by rubber puppets accompanied by Janet Jackson's synthesizer.

I think the FCC should be able to fine people for making blatant scientifically-inaccurate statements on any publicly televised broadcast. Her words OFFEND me more than Janet Jackson's boob ever could.

$50k here, $100k there - might make Sarah Palin think twice about her choice of words. (she might even switch to a teleprompter... OH NOES!)

>> ^Hybrid:
That's Gunther von Hagens in the background and at the end of the video, the guy who does the artworks with cadavers. This leads me to believe that this has come from one of his Channel 4 live autopsies or biological documentaries on UK TV. They use nude models (male and female) to illustrate key things to the audience at different points throughout the show.


Correct

>> ^Jinx:
>> ^RadHazG:
I'm not sure why she's naked either it doesn't really make any sense. As to the audience acting so calm its probably because its a British program (programme!) and surprising to most americans, in europe a womans body is just a body. While we in america go nuts and riot over janet jacksons brief half second patsy covered blurry tit, in europe nudity is no big deal, nor is sexuality in general. At least its not nearly as big a deal as it is here.

I dunno about that, you wouldn't see this programme before 9pm I think.
Why is she naked? Errrrrrrr...not 100%, but I think the comment above is correct. The corpses weren't clothed, so why would the living ones be either. Frankly I'm a little disappointed the Red Cross instructor was clothed and didn't check to see if the tongue had fallen into the girls throat with her own tongue.


I used demonstrator models for CPR in a water rescue course, the models will be naked as it's easier to see the rib structure and determine the the point of the sternum. It's vital that you're compressing the correct area for CPR to work effectively, giving the visual aid of being able to see where on the body to place your hands for resuscitation is a useful way of making sure first time learners (quite a few of the audience I'd imagine) will have a clearer idea of what to do and how to do it properly. Learning basic anatomy in situations like this are key, as you can apply what you know to all sizes and shapes of body rather than a guess of 'about there is good'.

>> ^RadHazG:
I'm not sure why she's naked either it doesn't really make any sense. As to the audience acting so calm its probably because its a British program (programme!) and surprising to most americans, in europe a womans body is just a body. While we in america go nuts and riot over janet jacksons brief half second patsy covered blurry tit, in europe nudity is no big deal, nor is sexuality in general. At least its not nearly as big a deal as it is here.

I dunno about that, you wouldn't see this programme before 9pm I think.

Why is she naked? Errrrrrrr...not 100%, but I think the comment above is correct. The corpses weren't clothed, so why would the living ones be either. Frankly I'm a little disappointed the Red Cross instructor was clothed and didn't check to see if the tongue had fallen into the girls throat with her own tongue.

I'm not sure why she's naked either it doesn't really make any sense. As to the audience acting so calm its probably because its a British program (programme!) and surprising to most americans, in europe a womans body is just a body. While we in america go nuts and riot over janet jacksons brief half second patsy covered blurry tit, in europe nudity is no big deal, nor is sexuality in general. At least its not nearly as big a deal as it is here.