What's Wrong With Wholesome?

We want nice, not spice!

by Thomas Lindaman
03/01/05

New York Times columnist Frank Rich went ballistic over Paul McCartney's performance and the tamer television ads at this year's Super Bowl. Judging from his column "Touchdown for the Indecency Police," Rich had a cow, a pig, and quite possibly a chicken or two. And who did he blame? Why, the right wing cabal, of course! Here's a sample.

This repressive cultural environment was officially ratified on Nov. 2, when [Janet] Jackson's breast pulled off its greatest coup of all: the re-election of President George Bush…The political bosses of "family" organizations have been emboldened ever since. They are spending their political capital like drunken sailors, redoubling their demands that the Bush administration marginalize gay people, stamp out sex education and turn pop culture into a continuous loop of "Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm."

But it's in this next segment that Rich really tells us what he believes.

That campaign cannot really banish salaciousness from pop culture, a rank impossibility in a market economy where red and blue customers are united in their infatuation with terrible music and even worse television.

First off, I hardly think we're in a "repressive cultural environment" because of Janet Jackson exposing a boob on the MTV Super Bowl Halftime Show. For one, she exposed two boobs: herself, and Justin Timberlake.

But Rich is missing the point here. The breast was only part of the overall problem. I don't know about Rich, but I watched last year's Super Bowl Halftime Show, and the exposed breast was only on screen for the blink of an eye. However, the offensive material was from top to bottom. When you see Nelly grabbing his crotch more than Michael Jackson with jock itch and lyrics where women say they're going to take their clothes off, and it's broadcast during a worldwide sporting event on CBS, there's a problem. (Either that, or any episode of "The Howard Stern Show.")

Compared to last year's Super Bowl Halftime Show, this year's was pretty tame. The worst word you heard was "Hell," during McCartney's performance of "Live and Let Die." Sure, it's not exactly what I would have chosen, but it wasn't "snooze city" as Rich described it. It certainly wasn't "Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farms," either. (For the record, Rebecca's pyrotechnics are just a shade better. Sorry, Sir Paul.)

I think it's time we dispel a current myth in pop culture that Rich has swallowed hook, line, and g-string. Wholesome entertainment is often equated with boring entertainment. Media types and their defenders always say, "We're only giving the people what they want," whenever they're questioned about their standards. If that's the case, who was the brain trust who said, "We want 'Who's Your Daddy' on the air as a series"?

The truth is the media don't always give us what we want. They give us what they think we want, and right now they think we want nothing but softcore pornography. (I get one phone call from the Nielsen folks and next thing you know, we get "Desperate Housewives.") But in recent years, we've seen several shows and a cable network or two pop up that take their programming in the opposite direction and they've been pretty successful. But in a world of "Fear Factor," "Survivor," and Jerry Springer, they're working in a vacuum. But enough about the space between network programming executives.

What the media don't understand is that by going to one extreme, they set themselves up for failure. People can only be titillated for so long before they start looking for something else to entertain them. (Heh, heh. I said "titillate.") So, in order to keep the viewers they have, these shows have to go even more extreme. Then, once people reach the new plateau (or is it depth?), the shows have to get even more extreme. A good example of this is "Fear Factor." That first season, the grossest thing the contestants had to eat was school cafeteria food. Now, they're eating scorpion brains, buffalo kidneys, and giraffe livers. (Come to think of it, isn't that what they put in school cafeteria food?) But with more wholesome shows, they don't go more wholesome. They actually try to write better shows.

And that's what happened with the Super Bowl Halftime Show this year. Instead of putting on a show that would make Caligula blush, the producers decided to put on someone with real talent. But instead of enjoying the show, Frank Rich was convinced that Paul McCartney was the latest convert to the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Dude, the guy sang "Back in the U. S. S. R." to appease the former Soviet Union so the Beatles could play there. That's not exactly a way to endear yourself to the Reaganite conservatives.

Hollywood may be getting the idea. The Drudge Report recently had an article showing that R-rated movies have started losing money, while movies with tamer ratings have started making money. Either the ratings system is getting looser than the slots at a dumb guy's casino, or we're starting to see the silent majority voting with their wallets. And if there's one thing Hollywood always listens to, it's the sound of cash registers. (Well, that and starlets saying, "Sure, I'll do a nude scene for 'Bimbo Stewardess Ninjas III.'")

We'll see if next year's halftime show is closer to Doris Day or "Debbie Does Dallas," but regardless of the outcome, it was good to be able to watch a real performer showcasing great talent against the backdrop of the Super Bowl again. Yep, that woman from the GoDaddy.com ad has big…talent. Oh, and Paul McCartney was good, too.

And that's the Bottom Line.