|
Posted By lincolnluxor on 2/05/04 @ 7:49:32 AM
|
AOL, Sponsor of the Halftime show of the Super Bowl, is demanding a REFUND after the 'contraversial' performance. Here is what was reported to yahoo news
| QUOTE | LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - The controversial Super Bowl halftime show, in which Janet Jackson (news) bared a breast to the chagrin of the NFL, CBS and show producer MTV, has touched the world's largest Internet service.
America Online has canceled plans to stream on-demand the halftime show that it reportedly paid $7.5 million to sponsor. The Time Warner-owned firm is reportedly seeking a refund for all or some of that money. Although AOL issued a statement distancing itself from what some government officials are calling a crass halftime performance, a representative declined comment on TW's desire for compensation from Viacom.
"While AOL was the sponsor of the Super Bowl halftime show, we did not produce it," the company said. "Like the NFL, we were surprised and disappointed with certain elements of the show. In deference to our membership and fans, AOL and AOL.com will not be presenting the halftime show online as originally planned."
The $7.5 million AOL paid to sponsor the halftime show included several ads for its new TopSpeed service. The sponsorship, therefore, represents a significant discount to the $2.3 million CBS reportedly charged per 30-second Super Bowl ad.
Reuters/Hollywoood Reporter
|
Do you think they should get there refund?
I personnaly think they're idiots for even trying! They got what they wanted out of it! ADVERTISING! There would be no way in hell that if I were the NFL I would refund them.
|
|
Posted By SoujiroTheTenken on 2/05/04 @ 10:47:54 AM
|
 Omg its a BREAST O_O The world has surely come to a end!
i seriously doubt they will get a refund...
|
|
Posted By tacoX on 2/05/04 @ 11:34:56 AM
|
Not a bigdeal at all -- they deserve nothing at all. Nobody really even cares anyways.
I think it was a publicity stunt to get Jacksons dieing career alive again.
|
|
Posted By surf on 2/05/04 @ 8:08:29 PM
|
|
I don't get what his problem is the boob was the best part of the half time show, I hate justin temberlake and would like if he were dead
|
|
Posted By lincolnluxor on 2/05/04 @ 11:07:22 PM
|
|
of course we don't care about the boob, BUT I know that I wouldn't want to be sitting there watching the super bowl with my kids and shit like that come on v_v
|
|
Posted By AnorexicCheerLDR on 2/06/04 @ 7:05:38 AM
|
|
luxor has a good point but since non of us i hope on this forums is married then i owuld say who cares not like the entire nipple an breast an all showed it was only the skinny part or not allot of the boob not like allot of ppl noticed anyways everyone i know is like wow that was an awesome performance and then the ones that did notice are all like YAYAYAYAYA boobies cause they are all perves but thats besides the point...
|
|
Posted By logic on 2/10/04 @ 12:35:46 AM
|
I do not think they deserve a refund. However, if I was the CEO of AOL or TimeWarner, I would try my hardest to get a refund, or compensation, as well.. that's just a business move, that anyone with any know-how of business would try.
You spend several million dollars on something, and tell me you wouldnt try to get it back if there was a very legitimate reason to attempt and do so.
Do they deserve it? No, I do not think so. They got what they paid for, massive advertising and promotion.. and I really don't think they are going to lose millions of dollars worth of customers because people are so offended by a breast, much less even tie it to AOL and blaming timewarner.
I, for one, think it was staged.
- She did not cover it up
- She was shocked, in an obvious fake way
- The lights were dimmed
- The sound was muted
- The cameras moved away, all simultaneously while this happened, some would argue even before it happened
I'm sorry, I really do think this was a publicity stunt, and it was not a lame one.. it was one of the bravest, and most original way to get Janet Jackson back in the lime light.
let's face it.. shes a great singer, great voice.. I dont personally like her music, but I recognize talent.. but her career has been on a mudslide downhill.. this boosted her publicity on a incomprehendable scale.
No, No refund is deserved or should be given.
I do think Janet Jackson and her publicist deserve a very good clap on the back, though.
|
|
Posted By demo on 2/10/04 @ 8:18:39 AM
|
I don't think they need to get their money back. They make enough already and its their fault for doing it in the first place.
|
|
Posted By platnum on 2/10/04 @ 9:47:11 AM
|
|
Isn't Janet like 50 years old?
|
|
Posted By lincolnluxor on 2/10/04 @ 10:06:16 AM
|
| QUOTE (platnum @ Feb 10 2004, 10:47 AM) | | Isn't Janet like 50 years old? |
ya.. like mid 40's... but she's still HOT! *I'd hit it*
|
|
Posted By logic on 2/10/04 @ 11:33:22 AM
|
She looks great for her age.. but i wouldnt touch it.. rumors maybe.. but i wouldnt take a chance with something that's been hit by so many ppl.... her box was dubbed 'pandora' 
|
|
Posted By lincolnluxor on 2/10/04 @ 11:42:59 AM
|
|
still man! you could go around with a picture of her saying...'I HIT THAT!' woot woot!
|
|
Posted By logic on 2/10/04 @ 1:16:05 PM
|
|
Or.. I could do that anyway.. if i wanted to..i mean..
|