I've reactivated my FTP mirror of ThomasC's files at ftp://65.92.251.122 and even included Kyle's large Ford GT file (very nice). The site will be up all night long.
So, I'm really wondering something: did anyone really get upset over the PR-stunt Janet jackson pulled? We were a bunch of people watching it, and everyone was like "wow, that was unexpected. could you pass the chips, please?"
But when you read the news, the FCC is investigating, everyone's "outraged", "family values", blah blah. Everyone's oh so concerned about one goddamn boobie! That's exactly why they pulled the stunt in the first place.
I really don't think "our children" will be warped for life by this. It was a risqué little stunt, nothing more. It was on for like a second before they cut away.
People in other countries are probably amused at the reaction though. Once again, they can laugh at the US hypocrisy: show as many murders and as much violence as you want, but one boobie in prime time, for a second? MY GOD!! CALL THE MEDIA CENSORSHIP PATROL!!
That's what I got after fishing for info. it struck me as odd that there would be so much interest generated in the commercial then not show it. Perhaps Pepsi thought they were showing too much skin to the US audience.
All commercials are offline, but will be put back online per request. It's just a tit, that's it, but I put the rip of Janet's top online per Tony-B's request.
And how about last year with the Miller Lite commercial with two women arguing and wrestling and stripping over whether Miller Lite has great taste or less filling?
My biggest issue was the completely disingenuous denials by Timberlake and Jackson. If they had simply admitted that they wanted to shock everyone, I'd have more respect (stopping short of condoning the actions, though). Instead, due to their desire to cover their asses legally, they insisted it wasn't planned. And that's what pisses people off even more--being treated like idiots. There is absolutely no way in hell it wasn't planned. And I blame CBS as well for not having a seven-second delay. Why didn't they, unless they were willing to expose themselves to surprises? (I can understand not having the delay during the game, due to logistical reasons with radio play-by-play.)
There's already a delay for the TV broadcast because of the bandwidth, at least through cable. One time, the TV commentary for a Bengals game really sucked, so I flipped on the radio commentary, but I didn't like it because it was at least a couple seconds ahead of the TV coverage. Why wouldn't they do it anyways? Are you saying that people would turn off their TVs in order to listen to the radio commentary that was 10 seconds ahead, or what?
NBC is now editing the new episode of ER where an 80- year old woman's breast is breifly shown during an examination, due to the "climate" created by the Super Bowl controversy.
The land of the free, home of the brave! Actually, it's rather depressing.