STORM2K

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 7:31 am**

http://www.accesshollywood.com/entertai ... etail.html

CBS list of presentators doesn't include Janet. Also a 5 minute delay will be the norm in the event next sunday to avoud another breast occurance from other hollywood people.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 9:41 am**

The President of the grammies did not make this decision. I believe it was Janet who pulled out on her own. Grammy execs said "It was censorship" Go figure.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 9:47 am**

I'm glad she had the grace to bow out!!!

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 9:52 am**

I don't know, I have mixed feelings about the whole ordeal. Part of me says that was tasteless and someone needs to pay the consequences, but then another part of me thinks that compared to all the other filth on TV that no-one says a word about, it was so minor. I will have to think more on this to figure out where I stand.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 10:04 am**

GulfBreezer wrote:I don't know, I have mixed feelings about the whole ordeal. Part of me says that was tasteless and someone needs to pay the consequences, but then another part of me thinks that compared to all the other filth on TV that no-one says a word about, it was so minor. I will have to think more on this to figure out where I stand.

I understand what you mean Gulf, but the way I look at it is that it has to start somewhere.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 10:33 am**

Here is what Fox reported this morning about Janet "bailing" out. They said that she was only to present an award, that award going to Luther Vandross, who will not be there, therefore her services are not required. lol

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 10:59 am**

"Here is what Fox reported this morning about Janet "bailing" out. They said that she was only to present an award, that award going to Luther Vandross, who will not be there, therefore her services are not required. lol"

and neither is her breast.... OOPS, did I say that? LOL

On a serious note, I agree with you Duck. There are lots of things on TV that shouldn't be shown. However, parents can pretty much filter it out. But the thing with Janet was on the Superbowl and no one should have been expecting anything like that to happen.
I have 2 kids. My daughter is 17 and my son is 9. We don't allow them to watch MTV and such. Of course, they can see much of the same on other networks, but my wife and I take time to check things out before they watch them. If we feel that there is content that they shouldn't see, they don't watch the show/network. We explain to them why we feel that way and so far we've had no problems.
I don't think we're overprotective, just trying to be good parents. I don't think a 9 yr old boy needs to be looking at a woman's breast. He'll learn soon enough about those things. On the other hand, I don't think my 17 yr old daughter needs to be watching some hot shot rock star grinding his hips in a vulgur manner either. Nor should she have been exposed to some whimpy millionaire singer ripping a woman's top off.
Ok, steppin down from my high horse. It's been one of those days. Got up at 6, turned on the puter, tried to dial up and no dial tone. DUH, that's what happens when you don't pay the phone bill LOL. My wife told me 2 or 3 days ago to pay the bill online and I forgot. I had to drive to hattiesburg to pay the bill.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 11:11 am**

timNms wrote:On a serious note, I agree with you Duck.

LOL! Wake up, Tim. I know you've a hard start to your day, but what and where are you agreeing with me? I haven't posted here yet.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2004 11:31 am**

j wrote:Here is what Fox reported this morning about Janet "bailing" out. They said that she was only to present an award, that award going to Luther Vandross, who will not be there, therefore her services are not required. lol

Gee, that was convenient! :roll: