This year's Superbowl seems to have been a rousing event, powered by the game being close and 80 million people seeing more skin than normally shown on prime time TV.
By now you know that halftime featured Justin Timberlake ripping away part of Janet Jackson's costume, revealing a shot of her breast, as they were singing the phrase "I'm gonna have you naked by the end of this song."
This has created a storm of controversy, including the head of the Federal Communications Commission ordering an investigation, calling the incident a "classless, crass and deplorable stunt."
Justin Timberlake called it a regrettable "wardrobe malfunction".
CBS (the game's broadcaster) and MTV (which produced the halftime show) claimed they had no idea it would happen. (right!)
The halftime entertainment also featured repeated groin grabs by cast members.
|
|
Discussion around this ranges from: "the world, who already believes that we are a degraded nation, now knows that we are,"
To "you're a bunch of Victorian prudes for even being concerned,"
To "I can't believe that my 10 and 13-year old kids were exposed to this trash" (Well, excuse me, but once you saw the first groin grab, why didn't you turn the set off until after the halftime show was over? I love how the responsibility for policing what our kids see somehow rests upon the networks instead of the parents who can simply turn it off. In our home we chose not to watch the game at all, spending that time talking and just being together as a family.)
But my favorite comment about the halftime show so far came from a woman who stated: "The key here is that Jackson sang "Rhythm Nation" a song conveying a message about how bad racism is and how it should be fixed. That's what everyone should have gotten from this performance."
If she wanted people to get the message that the world shouldn't be racist, she shouldn't have bared her breast!
It's sort of analogous to a candidate letting out a scream at the end of a speech when he was trying to reinforce the key messages of his campaign.
Or a TV evangelist using the money followers contributed to feed the poor and build the church into his personal multi-million dollar mansions.
Or a President who decries high unemployment rates, yet who pushes a bill to give illegal immigrants legal status.
Lesson learned: people don't hear what you say when your actions scream louder than the words.
So you'd better make sure that your actions are consistent with, or better yet, supportive of what you're trying to say.
For example, a ten million-dollar contribution to build a new police station in the heart of your inner city will generate far more press than repeated speeches decrying the lack of law and order.
Or, Mother Theresa going beyond words and prayers by living among and caring for the dying in India.
Or a company that creates workout and daycare facilities onsite, pays well, and appoints minorities and women as executive Vice Presidents over one who features the message in their corporate literature that they create a great quality of life for their employees.
These examples show how one shifts from consistency between message and actions, into making actions supportive of the message. That's what gets press over those who just talk the talk.
Switching Points Of View:
On the other side of the story - from Janet Jackson's point of view, she probably pulled one of the major publicity stunts of the year.
As one who is still seen by many as the darling little sister of Michael Jackson (hey there's another person who's actions are screaming pretty loudly right now... - it seems that strangeness may have a genetic quality...), Janet has just, in less than a second, changed her whole image.
Of course, those who have followed Jackson, know that she's been trying to make that change for years. Her music and videos have increasingly become overtly sexual, and in 1993 she appeared on the cover of Rolling Stone with two man's hands doing the job traditionally performed by a bra.
But though last night's stunt will be deplored by many an adult, it is certainly going to sell more CD's - which was her entire purpose.
So I guess she achieved what she wanted - she's famous for the moment, and will probably pocket another $10 million from that second of airtime. Plus she'll get to read about herself in a Trivial Pursuit question someday.
From a PR perspective, do stunts work? Absolutely.
I only hope that my readers will choose stunts that will make the world a better place, rather than tearing it down.
Like this article? Then Digg
It
or add it to your Del.icio.us Bookmarks!
Tags:
TrackBack
TrackBack
URL for this entry:
http://101publicrelations.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/6
Public Relations and Publicity Blog
What's That Again - Shirtless? »
