Leeway Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 (edited) Surprised not to see a thread on this week's controversy on the sex-laden intro to this week's Monday Night Football. If you haven't been paying attention, see below. So, was the skit just clean, sexy fun? Or was it smutty, salacious and inappropriate? Did it use and exploit sexual and racial stereotypes? Should the FCC hammer ABC for showing the skit? ABC Apologizes For 'Desperate' Football Intro By Leonard Shapiro Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, November 17, 2004; Page D01 After receiving complaints from viewers and the NFL, ABC Sports apologized yesterday for airing a sexually suggestive segment using Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver Terrell Owens and several stars of "Desperate Housewives" to introduce its "Monday Night Football" game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Eagles. "It was the most disgraceful thing I've ever seen," Pittsburgh Steelers owner Dan Rooney said in a telephone interview yesterday. "It's on at 9 o'clock. Kids are watching, and everyone starts to think this is the NFL. I've written a letter to the commissioner [Paul Tagliabue], and I don't think he can be very happy about it, either. We can't allow that kind of thing to happen." In a prepared statement, ABC, which is owned by the Walt Disney Company, said, "We have heard from many of our viewers about last night's 'Monday Night Football' opening segment and we agree that the placement was inappropriate. We apologize." The segment opened with actress Nicollette Sheridan, clad in only a towel, standing near Owens in the Eagles' locker room. On ABC's new hit series, Sheridan plays a character named Edie Britt, a multiple divorcee who has had a number of sexual conquests in her fictional neighborhood. Sheridan: "My house burned down and I need to take a long, hot shower. . . . So where are you off to looking so pretty?" Owens: "Baby, it's 'Monday Night Football.' Game starts in 10 minutes." Sheridan: "Oh, you and your little games. . . . I've got a game we can play." Later, with her back to the camera, Sheridan dropped the towel and Owens said, "Aw, hell, the team's going to have to win one without me." At that point, she jumped into his arms, and the scene cuts to two other "Desperate Housewives" actresses, Felicity Huffman and Teri Hatcher, who uttered MNF's signature slogan: "Are you ready for some football?" A Federal Communications Commission spokesman said the commission had received e-mail and telephone calls from viewers who were not happy with the scene and indicated the FCC likely will look into whether ABC violated broadcasting rules and standards. An NFL spokesman indicated the league had received similar complaints from unhappy viewers. The NFL issued a statement saying: "ABC's opening was inappropriate and unsuitable for a 'Monday Night Football' audience. While ABC may have gained attention for one of its other shows, the NFL and its fans lost." The scene was no surprise to the Eagles. It was taped Friday in their locker room at Lincoln Financial Field. Sheridan flew in from Los Angeles that day and the segment was taped between 5:30 and 8 p.m. "We appreciate that ABC has taken responsibility and has apologized for the opening of 'Monday Night Football,' " the Eagles said in a statement. "It is normal for teams to cooperate with ABC in the development of an opening for its broadcast. After seeing the final piece, we wish it hadn't aired." An Eagles source said the team was aware of ABC's plans to use a "Desperate Housewives" theme but indicated that no one from the team had seen the final product until it aired. The source indicated that the team "dropped the ball on this" and should have been more vigilant. Owens, who caught six passes for 134 yards and three touchdowns in Philadelphia's 49-21 victory over the Cowboys in Dallas, could not be reached to comment. In February, CBS and its parent company, Viacom, came under heavy criticism for the Super Bowl halftime show produced by Viacom's MTV subsidiary. In that now-famous incident, entertainer Justin Timberlake pulled off part of a costume worn by Janet Jackson, exposing her right breast. In September, the FCC fined CBS's 20 network-owned stations $550,000 over the incident. CBS has appealed the ruling. Here are some additional links: Dungy calls skit racially offensive Even Terrell Owens apologized: Owens Apologizes Edited November 19, 2004 by Leeway Quote
Jim Alfredson Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 It's ridiculous. Are we going back to Puritanism in this country? Or are people upset because a white woman went after a black man? You can show a dead rat being thrown into a blender and turned into a liquid which someone drinks on Fear Factor, but a naked woman jumping into a man's arms is offensive? What the fuck is wrong with this country? Quote
Leeway Posted November 19, 2004 Author Report Posted November 19, 2004 I think we are showing our Puritan cultural ancestry; that's part of the reason Bush was elected. There is a conservative backlash against displays of sexuality. But the question re: MNF, is that sex? or smut? or is there a difference? But I know what you are saying; this kind of touchiness about all things sex/sexy/sexual is not a good sign. As for the race angle, interesting that it was raised most vocally by an African American. Dungy's point is that by using a racial stereotype, you put African -Americans in a secondary position by caricaturing them. Quote
Noj Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 I wasn't offended at all by the sexual content, but I tire of the tasteless combining of sports and advertising. From renaming stadiums and bowl games to really stupid ads like this NFL bs--that's the real disgrace. Terrell Owens has no class. Are you ready for some football? Yeah I'm ready, stop trying to sell me some unrelated sleazy show. Stupid fricking light shows and fireworks started up the Clipper game the other night. Can I watch some hoop? Just announce the starting five and tip it up, I don't want to see all that shit. Smoke all throughout the Staples--that's great for the players to breathe. Who's the genius that decided basketball fans need more than the Clippers Spirit to entertain? Cue the dancing girls on the jumbotron when the ball isn't in play. Thanks thanks. Quote
connoisseur series500 Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 I didn't see the skit because I didn't watch the game. TV is full of smut. I think most of the programs market sex. I don't watch any of them, because I find them boring, but I see the advertisements along with samples of sex-laden dialogue. Anything to attract viewers. The sponsors think that the audience for football are mostly males, so they probably figured they could get away with the skit. I dunno. I guess keep the sexual stuff out of sports. I don't know. I don't really care very much about the issue. My kid can watch anything he wants. Saves me from having to "explain" the birds and the bees... Quote
Jim Dye Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 (edited) This is the dumbest fucking non-controversy I have ever seen. I think the media is making a much bigger deal about this than the people who complained in the first place. I guess the idiots on talk radio need something to yammer about and whip jesusland into a frenzy. Edited November 19, 2004 by Jim Dye Quote
connoisseur series500 Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 I also confess to a liking for T.O. I don't understand why he's so unpopular. The guy is funny and full of personality. His antics are a scream. He's also a damned good football player. Why all the hate for Terrell Owens? Quote
Noj Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 I always wanted to be the player who acted like he'd done it before. TO is the player who takes celebrating to its most assinine extremes. Quote
connoisseur series500 Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 yeah, but those dances of his... Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 (edited) You can show a dead rat being thrown into a blender and turned into a liquid which someone drinks on Fear Factor, but a naked woman jumping into a man's arms is offensive? What the fuck is wrong with this country? If I'm watching TV with my kids, I'd just as soon not see either. I'll be the first to admit that the MNF thing was "no big deal" in the grand scheme of things. Even a little "funny" in a jocky, testosterone-for-brains- kind of way. but ABC still showed poor judgemnet, I think. Lots of kids watch MNF, and that's more of a Porky's type gag. Do you want your preteen kids watching Porky's? Look, I'm as foul-mouthed a horndog as anybody here, probably worse, but I do know the meaning of the words "discretion" and "respect". I'm not about to go into some stranger's house and call Ashlee Simpson a "no-talent media-whore cunt", especially in front of kids. And I don't think it's a show of either discretion or respect to air a bit like this in early evening, especially on a show that draws "general" audiences. At least on Fear Factor, you know upfront it's going to be some funky shit. Yeah yeah yeah, I know, the demographic for MNF skews heavily male, but trust me, early on in the evening, there's families watching. Look -you don't have to be a "conservative" to be offended by the tremendous amount of low-brow crassness that's on so much TV these days. Never mind the "decency" angle, it's an insult to our intelligence to think that the only way to entertain us is by titillating our hormones. My kids are both teeagers now, but I'll tell you this - when they were younger, I got pretty pissed more than a few times when I'd try watching a prime time with them. Sexual innuendo, generous use of inapprpropriate (for their age) language, an "approving" attitude of thinking with your dick, all that kind of stuff, was/is the norm on most shows these days, escpecially sitcoms. What I like for myself in my own time and what I enjoy watching with my family is not always the same thing. That doesn't make me a "hypocrite", it makes me somebody with a sense of "appropriateness". It's MY living room, dammit, and I'd appreciate it if the programmers would respect the fact that between 7 & 10 PM CST, what I want in my living room is not going to be the same thing as what I want after the kids go to bed, and at least give me options. BTW - whatever happened to that whole "Family Hour" concept. Whose FCC got rid of that? This began to get discussed in the "Desperate Housewives" thread, but let me say it here - There's plenty of "wingnuts" out there more than willing to take it a LOT further than it needs to be took if some common sense don't take hold. There need to be no FCC action taken whatsoever, but if a little discretion doesn't come into play somewhere fairly soon, it's going to come to that. Mock "Jesusland" all you want, but that misses the point - people with families who are tired of the indiscriminate lowbrow assaults on intelligence and "decency" as it pertains to network TV aren't limited to any one region or political orientation. Last I heard, the airwaves still legally belong to we the people, and we the people have every right to get annoyed when "laugh" and "hardon" seem to have become synonymous on our airwaves. Edited November 19, 2004 by JSngry Quote
Jim Alfredson Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Last I heard, the airwaves still legally belong to we the people. No disrespect, but if you believe that, I got a bridge for sale... Quote
Bright Moments Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 already discussed earlier today in the desperate housewives thread! Quote
Leeway Posted November 19, 2004 Author Report Posted November 19, 2004 What about the race angle? Was this a bold showing of indifference to race and interracial sex? Was this an exploitation of black racial stereotypes? Was Dungy right to call ABC on this? Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Last I heard, the airwaves still legally belong to we the people. No disrespect, but if you believe that, I got a bridge for sale... Oh, I know. But I'm talking "legally". And if you're looking for a "wedge" issue to use on "conservatives", this is a DAMN good one, I think. Respect for "family values" vs "unrestricted commerce" on PUBLIC airwaves. Shit's outta wack, unquestionably, and who's let it happen? The Republican's FCC appointees have been very lax in this regard, Michael Powell's public pronouncements notwithstanding. More importantly, who's gonna restore some sanity and common decency? Who's gonna tell bizness that they must RESPECT US when it comesto what they use OUR airwaves for? It can be the wingnuts, or it can be us. Who do ya' trust more? Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 What about the race angle? Was this a bold showing of indifference to race and interracial sex? Was this an exploitation of black racial stereotypes? Was Dungy right to call ABC on this? I think that one's gonna get totally personal, highly variable mileage. Quote
Jim Dye Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Well, If you do not want your kids to see something like that, then you better just throw the whole damn television in the trash. That skit was nothing compared to DAYTIME television. There has been dry humping on network television for years! I don't see why NOW all of a sudden people are shocked and offended. What about all the erectile disfunction drug ads? What about all the beer ads with twins shaking their twins? Why is this a big deal now? Was this skit the straw that broke the camel's back? I thought we Americans liked a little sex with our violence? Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Well, If you do not want your kids to see something like that, then you better just throw the whole damn television in the trash. That skit was nothing compared to DAYTIME television. There has been dry humping on network television for years! I don't see why NOW all of a sudden people are shocked and offended. What about all the erectile disfunction drug ads? What about all the beer ads with twins shaking their twins? Exactly. So should the "conservatives" have any claim on "exclusivity" to this issue? Don't "liberals" find all this bullsht just as offensive and demeaning? I know I do. Am I alone? Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Somebody tell me why I should have to either shut up and take it or " throw the whole damn television in the trash". Please, somebody tell me. Quote
Jim Dye Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Well, you make a good argument for why we need to take back the airwaves. I agree that the skit and so much else is offensive and demeaning to women. TV does play to the lowest common denominator. However, most of the people who I have heard chime in on this subject were not concerned about objectification of women, or anything else resembling any kind of deep thought. They were offended because there was a half naked woman on TV. It wasn't the context, it was the skin. That's where I have seen a difference. Quote
connoisseur series500 Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Somebody tell me why I should have to either shut up and take it or " throw the whole damn television in the trash". Please, somebody tell me. Sex obviously sells, Jim. All the dry humping apparently leads to higher ratings. I guess I don't care too much because I don't watch the stuff. It's apparently what the people want. Quote
Jim Alfredson Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Somebody tell me why I should have to either shut up and take it or " throw the whole damn television in the trash". Please, somebody tell me. It's the American Way... sponsored by Net Zero! Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Well, you make a good argument for why we need to take back the airwaves. I agree that the skit and so much else is offensive and demeaning to women. TV does play to the lowest common denominator. However, most of the people who I have heard chime in on this subject were not concerned about objectification of women, or anything else resembling any kind of deep thought. They were offended because there was a half naked woman on TV. It wasn't the context, it was the skin. That's where I have seen a difference. Well, half a "meeting point" is better than none, no? The alternative is to let the "wingnuts" have this show all to themselves, and then what do we do? Sit here and bitch about how "they're taking over"? Quote
JSngry Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 Somebody tell me why I should have to either shut up and take it or " throw the whole damn television in the trash". Please, somebody tell me. Sex obviously sells, Jim. All the dry humping apparently leads to higher ratings. I guess I don't care too much because I don't watch the stuff. It's apparently what the people want. Tell it to the late Sylvester Weaver, a.o. Sorry, but I personally find the "we're only giving the people waht they want" argument to be total bullshit. Giving people what you know will titillate them and hook'em is not the same as giving them what they want - it's removing options in favor of a sure thing, simple as that. Pretty cowardly, I say. Quote
Jim Dye Posted November 19, 2004 Report Posted November 19, 2004 I'm tempted to keep this exchange going until you hit the magical 10,000 post count! However, I have to be up early. Have a good night y'all. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.