MTV exploitation?

Karma

Karma

Heart Attack
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
7,430
Location
Outside of time and space
Well, MTV got what it wanted...the VMAs are the hot topic still, TWO DAYS after their broadcast from Las Vegas...at the PALMS no less.

But did they EXPLOIT people to GET the kind of buzz the VMAs havent enjoyed since 2003 when Madonna set the world on fire with her performance with Britney , Christina and Missy?

Let's begin with what EVERYONE is talking about: BRITNEY'S "BOMB" of a performance.

WHY was it bad? aside from her OUT OF SYNCH LIP SYNCHING and that ridiculous excuse for a weave...but apparently according to "critics"...her BODY is bad? WHY is that? because she's THICK now? yes she was sexy when she was taut and thinner but her body was NOT sloppy sunday night. she wore the hell out of that bikini AND keep in mind she's had TWO children. So she's curvy now...does that mean she's unattractive? as a woman ..i PERSONALLY am offended at the way so many people are slamming her just because of her curvy figure. I've struggled with my own vanity issues on weight (and i admit its by my own neuroses lol) but if you're going to PAN her performance, let it be for something LEGITAMATE...not her weight.

Did MTV set her up to fail? reports indicate that the producers NIXED the ideea she originally wanted to use for her show at the last minute. there also evidence that one of her stilletto heeled boots was broken, which would account for her wobling and poor coordination on her dance routine.

Sometimes BAD PRESS is what makes something memorable..remember Madonna and the SEX BOOK? despite the backlash it became one of the highest selling books in the history of the new york times best seller list and her CD erotica? it was greeting with negativity and STILL garnered her 2 more number one hits and was commercial selling success. But MADONNA knew what she was doing and she fought back against her critics. Britney is getting dogged left and right and clearly doesnt know how to defend herself publicly.

I suspect MTV knew what it was doing and used Britney as the means to generate hype and publicity at HER expense.

What do you all think?
 
Well, having a curvy figure is fine, but don't wear such a midriff revealing outfit if you haven't done a situp in a year.
 
The problem was total. Britney was unprepared, her dancing was subpar, and the outfit did not suit her new figure. She would have done MUCH better in a miniskirt and a corset top to accentuate her new curves without that unwanted jiggle.

As for MTV, the fact that they exploit people is not new (reality TV now instead of videos?). Another issue for me is how they are glad to eat up the money that artists like Kanye, 50 Cent, and Timbaland create but still put Britney's no-hit-in-forever ass up there.
 
I saw absolutely nothing wrong with Britney's body. Yes, she's not as thin as she used to be, but she looked damn good up there. I don't get why everyone's slamming her over it? Just because she's not a size 2 anymore doesn't mean she can't work a two piece stage outfit. I'm sorry, but if BEYONCE is considered being one of the 'best' (and I use that term loosely) bodies in the music buisness, then I guess I need to get my eyes checked, because Britney is in FAR better shape than her. It just pisses me off that everyone's focusing on her body rather than the actual performance, because she looked fine in my opinion.

As for the performance, I was very disappointed in it, as I pointed out in the shoutbox during the show. She didn't look like she was trying at all. I was really expecting something spectacular that would blow everyone out of the water and really show people that she's back. But it looked like she walked on stage, sighed out, and was mentally going, 'lets get this over with'. I don't know...there could be other reasons as to why her performance wasn't as good as it could have been, but people don't care about that. They like to gossip about the negative, and MTV is eating it up. I feel bad for her.
 
The difference is that Beyonce has curves and shows them off flatteringly. She would have never put herself out there like that. That skimpy SOUTH BEACH number was not very flattering at all to Britney. And if that were all I think she would have been OK, but it is now something else to hate when you consider the performance.

Honestly Britney's body is not bad at all, but bad for THAT. If the bottoms would have even been a bit more substantial, maybe a little higher built in front to mask the slight tummy, it would have been better. But after looking at it again, it almost seems the bottoms were picked to show off the jiggle she did have, almost framing it for the viewer. Simply a bad choice...
 
See, I don't find anything about Beyonce's body flattering, regardless of what she wears. It just looks awkward to me. And I understand that she's naturally curvy and she works what she has, but I find her far less appealing than most people do.

As for Britney's outfit, I really didn't see anything wrong with it. Aside from the fact I thought it was pointless to wear it (I think it would of be better with, as you said, a corset and short or skit combo purly for the overall look of the performance). But I thought she looked fine in it. I just don't understand why people think you have to be a size 1 or 2 to wear stuff like that. It looks far more appealing in my eyes if whomever's wearing booty shorts can actually fill them out. I mean, she had a little jiggle here and there, but oh well? She likes to eat, big deal. lol
 
But thats the thing, Britney was chosen because her new single IS HOT. its getting buzz and industry insiders like Diddy and Timbaland (whose own disciple "Danga" PRODUCED Brit's new album) have all gotten behind Britney on this project. Her last HITS came from the album "In the zone" ( Me against the music, Breath on me, Toxic, Outrageous) and since then she's had two kids, a divorce, a failed reality show and a host of personal problems. would anyone complain if Whitney or Mariah had been chosen to open the show over Kanye? BOTH OF THEM have had FEW hits in some years now. If it werent for the MARKETING and PROMOTIONAL JUGGERNAUT that Antonio "L.A." Ried launched on behalf of Mariah and her "Mimi" album...would it have worked? probably not considering the two albums BEFORE that BOMBED so SHE's only JUST gotten on the "comeback trail".

I think Britney is getting an unfair slant against her.

YES there were some glaring problems but ANYONE couldve been picked to open the show. Kanye is an arrogant ass whose ego enters the room five minutes BEFORE he does and STAYS five minute AFTER he leaves. He had a temper tantrum at the GRAMMYS too when the world didnt fall at his feet (as he thought they should have). First he BLASTED Britney during the MTV VMA preshow as he complained that he shouldve been opening and not her and NOW he's saying she was exploited. I AGREE with him but I personally think he needs an ego check.

Beyonce's body aint all that. not to me...and HER weaves are just as ridiculous. they may LOOK nicer but give me a break...we all know that aint her real hair. its called FUSION, EXTENSION and SEW IN :rolleyes: Britney has always had a BETTER, more toned body than Beyonce.

Britney is thicker now and has curves but she wasnt sloppy at all. she may not have had a FLAT/SIX PACK and while a corsett with a mini skirt OR "hot pants" to show off her ass [which clearly she was sporting a fuller one than ever before lol] (Christina Aguilera did that when SHE was sporting a thicker look back in 2003) I think Brit wore her outfit pretty damn WELL considering she's had two kids.

Also there was the matter of her boots. She's shown she can dance in stillettos before, just look at her performance with Madonna, but its been reported that the boots she wore at this VMA show were defective in someway AND that the entire outfit was a last minute change up.

STILL it seems that MTV wanted controversy and they got it...at Britney's expense.
 
Let me open by saying that I didn't watch the VMAs... and so, I didn't see Britney's performance. I REFUSE to go to MTV's site and watch the clip, too, because that generates business for MTV.com and I just don't like MTV because it's SUPPOSED to be MUSIC-TV but it's NOT. They should jsut DROP all pretense that they are about the music at all. Unless it's four o'clock in the morning, you're not going to catch a music video on 'MTV'. Rather, they've polluted their network with reality tv -- or even worse--- psuedo reality tv. The Hills, Laguna Beach, My Super Sweet Sixteen.... NEXT, Parental Control, Date my Mom, its ALL crap and frankly, it's one of the main reasons our society is declining to the point that it's ridiculously and almost comically SAD. Now I don't know that the MTV VMA big wigs set Britney up to fail intentionally, but they most CERTAINLY are reaping the benefits from the controversy and I know that they INTENDED to generate some kind of buzz. No matter HOW Britney did, MTV would have been better for it. She HASNT had a hit in a while and if this had been the comeback performance she needed, MTV would STILL have gotten to ride the wave. Unfortunately, according to just about everyone, Britney's performance tanked-- but that's only unfortunate for BRITNEY.... not MTV. Everybody and their mother wants to see this allegedly terrible performance and that's good business for MTV. I would DEFINITELY agree that MTV is an exploitive entity.

Now, as far as the Britney body issue, I agree with Sam and Farrah. Criticize her PERFORMANCE all you want.... but she's FAR from fat and just WHAT the hell is wrong with everybody for attacking her weight? It's quite irrelevant to the performance and I think it just goes to show how unhealthy America's obsession with weight is that a woman who's given birth twice and has WELL DOCUMENTED emotional problems and possible mental instability. Weight should be the least of her concerns and the BOTTOM of the list of things to criticize regarding her performance. Her figure had NO effect on her showmanship and its not like it was any kind of hindrance as far as range of motion or mobility goes. I mean REALLY.... its No WONDER half of the 'It' girls looked like reanimated SKELETONS recently.
Show a little less definition than you had five years ago and suddenly you're one of the fat girls.

And don't even get me STARTED about Kanye West. That man makes me sick. Not ONLY is he nauseatingly arrogant, but he turns EVERYTHING into some kind of race debate. He was quoted hinting that Britney was chosen over him for the opener because she was white.... and it just makes me cringe because how will we as a NATION ever recuperate from racism if we have celebrities like Kanye West, who influence millions of young people, propelling racially biased theories?

Kanye is just RETARDED. I find that I can't remember just WHAT he got famous for in the first damn place, but I CAN say this: Britney Spears was a BETTER choice for an opener than him. Never mind that she hasn't had a hit in a while.... she HAS HAD way more hits than he has and she's been around for almost ten years now. She's got a measurable, if minute, amount of longevity and choosing Britney to possibly stage a COMEBACK was an incredibly more sound decision than Kanye West. Maybe HIS performance would have been better, but HELLO.... everybody WANTED to see what would become of Britney and I heard Justin Timberlake had a STELLAR performance.... and yet.... everyone's STILL talking about Britney. Kanye's just jealous, and it's painfully obvious that he's saying all this stuff to shift the attention to himself.
 
To go off topic for a second I have to give props to Chris Brown in his performance. I thought he rocked the house with his hot dance moves that were very similar to Michael Jackson. I actually thought he was by far the best performer there over Justin Timberlake. I'm surprised nobody mentioned Chris lol. Which, he received a standing ovation for his performance. ;)

Now, as for Britney and her weight, we all know how being in the entertainment business focus' on a celebrities weight, physical looks, and their personal life. Each of these plays a star role in the musicians life. As Farrah made a great argument about Madonna and her provocative sex book. Yet, Madonna has always been in control of her life and her career. Britney is lacking in that department. I think with Britney being micro managed as a mere teenager she sought to rebel, which is why she's partying hard and out boozing it. Having children and boozing plays a large effect on the body. However, I thought Britney didn't look bad. She worked hard to get in shape. Even though she's not stick thin she looked decent. My point is the media focus' on a celebrities weight and if your not a size three your not "thin." The average American is a size twelve. Which in the fashion industry that's "fat." So, I think with all the critics out there they saw Britney as "ugly" or "fat" because she wasn't as toned when she was first propelled onto the music scene. When someone thinks "comeback" they think makeover or change.

With so many rising young starlets on the scene it poses more pressure for veterans like Britney, who has taken a break from the music scene. Unlike Madonna who kept coming with smash hits, singles, and albums.

As for Brit's performance? I figured the viewer would be pumped up by her but instead it was the exact reversal. I felt she looked bored and not into what she was trying to sell, to promote even. It seemed like her dancers were more prepared for the performance than she was.

I personally don't think MTV set her up to fall. They took a chance on Brit' to open the show with a bang. Which she didn't however because of her less than enthusiastic performance. But, because of it there has been plenty of gossip and buzz over it. If anything I think MTV set her up to market their channel and the overall show. So that next time Spears performs viewers will tune in to see if Brit bombs or if she rocks. Sort of like their very own personal reality show (which I thought Lexi's argument was brilliant and true).

We, as humans love indulging in reality television. Which is the reason MTV has done nothing but to promote reality television shows. Its a nice distraction from our everyday lives to watch people with more drama than our own life lol.

Take Whitney Houston and her drama with Bobby Brown and her Rehab. Does anyone remember when she performed soon after it? She was drenched in sweat and people talked about it for days lol. Same thing is happening with Britney.
 
Last edited:
As for Britney opening the VMAs, I was intrigued but I was also sympathetic with Kanye West's criticisms. Britney has been a train wreck with no hits for a while. Meanwhile, MTV lines its pockets on Wests hits. To say that taking a chance on Britney's comeback vs. Kanye's present to me makes little sense. Would they have picked Michael Jackson over everyone? Doubt it, even though he is a bigger star than all of them.

In addition, MTV has had a bad reputation for a while as far as racial insensitivity goes. Sony had to threaten them to get Michael Jackson on back in the day, and there has been a steady stream of criticism that it holds rap and R&B videos to a higher standard than other videos. So for me his criticism have some weight. Is he being a bit petulant and whiny? Maybe. Is he full of it? Not at all.

We will never get away from the problems of race in this country until we acknowledge and change the fact that you can be Black and more talented, yet not receive the recognition you deserve.As long as whites reject race issues as a "card" to play and fail to realize that we cannot fix in 40 years what it took 4 HUNDRED years to create, we will have problems in this country.
 
Rampage said:
As for Britney opening the VMAs, I was intrigued but I was also sympathetic with Kanye West's criticisms. Britney has been a train wreck with no hits for a while. Meanwhile, MTV lines its pockets on Wests hits. To say that taking a chance on Britney's comeback vs. Kanye's present to me makes little sense. Would they have picked Michael Jackson over everyone? Doubt it, even though he is a bigger star than all of them.
Click to expand...

according to whom? LOL Michael Jackson has earned his place in music and entertainment history, that much cant be denied BUT this isnt 1984 and 100's...1000's of albums have been released since "Thriller". you cant rest on the laurels of one thing nearly 20 years later. He's a bigger TRAIN WRECK perhaps. Whitney too. And Heather makes a good point, how many times has Whitney been the subject of scrutiny for half assed perforamnces on stage in RECENT years...INCLUDING a Michael Jackson special where Britney ALSO performed?


Michael cant compete with his cheif rivals anymore , Madonna, Prince and his own sister Janet have ALL managed to out last him in an age where kids are HARDLY as loyal or appreciative of MUSIC and TALENT.




In addition, MTV has had a bad reputation for a while as far as racial insensitivity goes. Sony had to threaten them to get Michael Jackson on back in the day, and there has been a steady stream of criticism that it holds rap and R&B videos to a higher standard than other videos. So for me his criticism have some weight. Is he being a bit petulant and whiny? Maybe. Is he full of it? Not at all.
Click to expand...

again, this was 20 years ago. what about Chaka Khan? Gladys Knight? MTV Raps and its host, Fab Five Freddy? and so many other GROUND BREAKING strides to propell the presentation "black music" on MTV? Michael Jackson can hardly be cited NOW a days....most black people that i know personally DESPISE Michael.

if anything MTV has exploited the imagery of hip hop and rap now more than ever before , just as Lexi said...MTV is full of pseudo reality television CRAP and hardly plays ANY videos of ANY genre or artist

We will never get away from the problems of race in this country until we acknowledge and change the fact that you can be Black and more talented, yet not receive the recognition you deserve.As long as whites reject race issues as a "card" to play and fail to realize that we cannot fix in 40 years what it took 4 HUNDRED years to create, we will have problems in this country.
Click to expand...


i agree whole heartedly! that its a problem that will never go away until some things are TRULY addressed, but in regards to MTV- Kanye having a temper tantrum b ecause he didnt get his way is hardly a start. the man is arrogant as HELL and he talks out of both sides of his mouth. FIRST he bashed Britney for getting the opening spot, THEN he decries MTV for exploiting her. WHICH IS IT?

Kanye and Britney are BOTH talented in DIFFERENT ways...just as people would rush to say the same thing when comparing Mariah to Madonna. Kanye is nothing more than a MALE VERSION of Missy Elliot and while im not trying to derail him...how long have we been seeing this trend of "super producer turned rapper turned music mogul?" is it because he's BLACK that he should have automatically been given preference over BRITNEY or ANYONE ELSE because they were white?

PERSONALLY i will admit that if Kanye had b een the opener, i would NOT have raced to watch it because to me, his performances are NOT as show stopping as Britney's and the girl has been given acollades to rival MADONNA for her stage productions on the VMA in times past. would you pick Kanye over Madonna to open the show? i sure wouldnt. hell even if it were Mariah or Whitney OR Michael Jackson (pre zombie/mannequin face and creepy child molester reputation) ....i would pick someone who has a HISTORY of show stopping numbers to open and Britney HAS that. she's been doing this for almost over a decade. Kanye was a PRODUCER BEHIND THE SCENES and didnt come to the forefront until just a couple years ago.
 
I watched the entire MTV music awards, and the ONLY performances I fast forwarded through were Kanye Wests (and Akon's mini performance because he's a douche). I enjoy some of his music, and he's undeniably talented, but as a performer, he's mediocre in my opinion. Any rapper can stand there and bob their body while waving their hand in the air, and that's exactly what Kanye did in his performance. If he were to have opened the show with his hit, Stronger, and did what he did in his suite performance, it wouldn't have been anything special. (Hell, I would of pput Chris Browns performance as the opener over Kanye West's, it fucking rocked.)

Britney on the other hand has had three previous performances on the MTV music awards (Opps I Did it Again, I'm a Slave For U, and teaming up with Madonna) and all three of those performances were talked about and STILL talked about because of the controversy and sheer entertainment. MTV was smart. They booked Britney because they knew, regardless if she tanked or did fabulous, their network would be talked about. It was a win win situation for them. Did they exploit her? I believe they did. I think they're eating this entire situation up.
 
according to whom? LOL Michael Jackson has earned his place in music and entertainment history, that much cant be denied BUT this isnt 1984 and 100's...1000's of albums have been released since "Thriller". you cant rest on the laurels of one thing nearly 20 years later. He's a bigger TRAIN WRECK perhaps. Whitney too. And Heather makes a good point, how many times has Whitney been the subject of scrutiny for half assed perforamnces on stage in RECENT years...INCLUDING a Michael Jackson special where Britney ALSO performed?
Click to expand...

To say that Michael Jackson is not the star that Britney is...boggles the mind. That would be like saying that New Kids On The Block is bigger than the Beatles. NKOTB have had more recent hits. It has been a while for the Beatles and some of the team is dead, but the Beatles win that every time.

And Michaels Jackson has not just one big album in Thriller(104X platinum worlwide, 7 #1 hits in the US). He also had Bad (30x Platinum worldwide, 5 #1 hits in the US), Dangerous (30x platinum worldwide), HIStory (18x platinum worldwide, biggest selling multi-disc offering EVER), Blood on the Dance Floor (6X platinum, biggest remix album sales EVER) and Invincible in 2001 (8X platinum worldwide, 2 top 20 Billboard hits). And when you watch anyone's show, if it is good and the dancers are fantastic, remember that MICHAEL is primarily responsible for that and Madonna as well and James Brown before them BOTH.

As for Whitney, she has also attempted a comeback, but MTV would not THINK to try to put her there in that coveted spot. The same probably should have been the case for Britney.

I could live with Justin Timberlake as he is relevant and currently successful, but I can understand the questions when Britney, a mess of a FADED former star, is compared to Kanye West, who is current, relevant, and highly successful with a pair of platinum albums and a third to come days after the VMAs were shown.

To call Kanye a male Missy Elliot would be to not give him the due he deserves. He is a true producer AND skilled rapper who has created a large amount of the good material in recent years while Britney was trailer trashing it with K-Fed.

As for MTVs so-called steps in Black music, I remember not knowing when YO! MTV raps would be on because they jerked its time slot around (it was largely a response to BET's rap videos and the chunk of viewership it managed to siphon in any case), or when they refused to show many rap artist's videos while rock group after rock group showed scantily clad ladies and referred to both sex and violence with little oversight. As for getting their due, I have seen year after year where artists who sell less albums get awards and kudos over Black artists. Even Eminem laughs at it on his song White America, "I go to TRL, look how many hugs I get."

Truth be told, Britney has been riding the "Madonna for this generation" thing for a while, minus the talent and relevance. Her body at the VMAs was fine ( I LOVE curves!), but not for her outfit. Her performance vs. West's speaks for itself; and it at some point should be time to allow the people who are in coveted positions on the VMAs to be chosen on MERIT. Britney's was NOT, and Kanye West I believe had every right to be pissed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I watched Yo MTV Raps religiously - but I don't think it was a race thing that they weren't giving it more airtime. That was a different time, when all that godawful hair band crap was king. Then of course there was a 180 to when rap, well I'll say hip hop, ruled MTV and you could hardly find any rock on there.

As for MTV not playing videos anymore - yes, I agree that sucks, but as an exec from MTV who came and spoke to my class a few years back said, people voted with their remote controls. People didn't sit an watch videos anymore, they flipped channels. So by putting the crap on they held viewership. Not my viewership of course, but...
 
I don't know what MTV you're watching, but whenever I actually see a music video (and that's very rarely unless it's 3 in the morning like Lexi said) it's always rap, hip hop, or R&B. The majority of the VMA's for the past couple of years have awarded mainly hip hop r&b artists, not to mention the majority of the performances during the award shows as well. I even remember sitting around a couple years back going, where the hell is all the rock and alternetive music? It's either all booty shaking music or emo crap that's being played on MTV because that's what kids like now adays. My 12 year old sister knows more rap songs than I do now, and that's because she watches nothing but MTV. So I have to disagree about MTV not catering to the rap and r&b community.

As for Kanye being pissed about Britney, frankly, I could give two shits. MTV was going with who would get them ratings, period. Obviously Kanye wasn't going to rack in the ratings that Britney's 'anticipated comeback' would. MTV is a buisness, first and foremost. They didn't pick her over him because he's black and she's white. That's just ridiculous and stupid to think. They chose her because people were going to watch to see whether she would screw up or not. And obviously it worked.
 
what's STUPID is the fact that MTV execs THINK that "viewers" want to see the crap that they broadcast on MTV these days. the pseudo reality crap (most of which encourages a poser hip hop persona). what Vil said about the MTV exec that spoke to her at school is amazing...simply because i have to wonder where were they drawing their results from? NEILSON households? or what? MTV doesnt seem to cater to anyone over 25....its like the programming is geared toward people who have an acute form of ADD or something LOL.

as for Kanye? TALENT doesnt make up for ARROGANCE...which he has PLENTY of. He trashed the Grammys for the same thing...and yet if his new album continues to do well, 10 to 1 we will see him at the next Grammys show in '08. i REALLY dont think them choosing Britney over Kanye was a race issue, NOR do i think over the past 15 years ( i wont go back 20 because there WAS a time where they willfully didnt play any black artist but Michael Jackson on their channel) has their been a racial bias. Like sam and vil said...many times we've seen different genre's of music dominate the channel. there was grunge/alternative, rock/hair bands, and for a LONG time it was hip hop/rap. the only way you were going to survive these times is IF you were an artist like Mariah, Madonna or Janet....someone who could cross genre's with their music style.
 
Persephone said:
I don't know what MTV you're watching, but whenever I actually see a music video (and that's very rarely unless it's 3 in the morning like Lexi said) it's always rap, hip hop, or R&B.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm saying. Back in the days of Yo MTV Raps in the late 80's/early 90s, it was exactly the opposite.
 
Alycia Barnett said:
what Vil said about the MTV exec that spoke to her at school is amazing...simply because i have to wonder where were they drawing their results from? NEILSON households? or what? MTV doesnt seem to cater to anyone over 25....
Click to expand...

They're not catering to people over 25. You can't even be in the audience for their shows if you're over 23.

As for the data thing - think about it. A video comes on you don't like...you change the channel. It's too difficult to hold viewers. And if people weren't watching the crap they put on MTV, they'd show something else.
 
Vilandra said:
That's exactly what I'm saying. Back in the days of Yo MTV Raps in the late 80's/early 90s, it was exactly the opposite.
Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't commenting you before, I was commenting on what Garrick said. I was actually agreeing with you. lol :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top