Gaga's Gun Bra Sparks Outrage

[Nissa 51]

You're so off it's not even funny. You clearly don't actually watch MSNBC so this is awkward. Here's a video from a program on MSNBC that directly contradicts what you've just posted http://www.youtube.c...h?v=uXfX6dyBHUU

And another, with even the in house republican host of the morning show completely taking back all of his past support for guns after the sandy hook tragedy. http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Z7FRMTJNClY I'm unsure as to why you think MSNBC is secretly not as liberal as they say they are haha it's comical really

Dude. I take courses on and research this stuff (and thoroughly, I might add) and you think I have never watched MSNBC? I watch Rachel Maddow almost every single day as she's a breath of fresh air so yes, I've already watched that bit and I feared for her effing job on this one - she is, however, not featured on the news or most of prime time for a reason (which are the times I was talking about, obviously), just like Morning Joe isn't either. Talk shows on MSNBC shun her for the very reason that she's too liberal and has gone against their channel's sponsors on a multitude of issues.

Joe Scarborough ran as a Republican for a short while and probably now just votes Republican (and is a ****ing male chauvinist to boot), he's been a serious gun enthusiast his entire life and he still supports the 2nd Amendment a lot - what he did was take issue with the craziness that made up the entire NRA reaction to Sandy Hook - something that would get him thrown out of his party or Fox, were he employed there. He gets leniency because 1) MSNBC, in general, does not mess with their non-prime time shows (see also Rachel Maddow - but don't be waiting for any more coverage on gun legislation by her, either), especially not ones like "Morning Joe" and especially not talking show hosts who could shout "Censorship by those liberals! Hitler!" to the already liberal-hatin' media who'd lap it up. MSNBC talk show hosts NOT affiliated with the news (as correspondents, anchors or working on after-news dissection programs and commentary) would frankly be the only ones who could come out in favor of gun control without knowing they wouldn't get thrown out the same day, and 2) content, spin and even debate topics go through production/upper management for every single news-related show, politics-related debate and especially for the news itself. Talk shows are more lenient anyway, and MSNBC would definitely NOT want to get bad press for denouncing or firing a Republican employee because his talking point was, in essence, too Democratic.

This isn't a black and white issue, sure, which is why taking two extreme examples (Rachel who brings in the ratings and Scarborough the one Republican staffer) and calling it proof is just ridiculous. By the way, the channel is still 48% owned by the second-largest gun manufacturer in the world, sorry if that hurts you. Just stop this idiocy, you're making me clutter the thread with non-relevant information.

[Fresh 1]

Everyone is always picking on Gaga like dam leave her alone they act like she's the only "bad influence" in the world :nacho:

[Space Banana 0]

Dude. I take courses on and research this stuff (and thoroughly, I might add) and you think I have never watched MSNBC? I watch Rachel Maddow almost every single day as she's a breath of fresh air so yes, I've already watched that bit and I feared for her effing job on this one - she is, however, not featured on the news or most of prime time for a reason (which are the times I was talking about, obviously), just like Morning Joe isn't either. Talk shows on MSNBC shun her for the very reason that she's too liberal and has gone against their channel's sponsors on a multitude of issues. Joe Scarborough ran as a Republican for a short while and probably now just votes Republican (and is a ****ing male chauvinist to boot), he's been a serious gun enthusiast his entire life and he still supports the 2nd Amendment a lot - what he did was take issue with the NRA's obvious fear-mongering and mob-tactics and called a for a bit of gun control in light of said craziness that made up the entire NRA reaction to Sandy Hook - something that would get him thrown out of his party or Fox, were he employed there. He gets leniency because MSNBC generally does not mess with their non-prime time talk shows, especially not with those who host them and especially not ones like "Morning Joe". This would be frankly the only place where a media personality could come out in favor of gun control without knowing they wouldn't get thrown out the same day.

Content, spin and even debate topics go through production/upper management for every single news-related show, politics-related debate and especially for the news itself. Talk shows are more lenient anyway, and MSNBC would definitely NOT want to get bad press for denouncing or firing a Republican employee because his talking point was, in essence, too Democratic. This isn't a black and white issue, sure, which is why taking two extreme examples (Rachel who brings in the ratings and Scarborough the one Republican staffer) and calling it proof is just ridiculous. By the way, the channel is still 48% owned by the second-largest gun manufacturer in the world, sorry if that hurts you. Just stop this idiocy.

Rachel Maddow is in THE 9PM prime time slot.... just. stop. And I want to know where the **** you're getting this "48%" owned by gun manufacturer bull****. Also, I wasn't aware that you could take a course on "this stuff." A course on MSNBC and where they stand on gun control? A course on conspiracies? Oh and Rachel Maddow is just ONE of the many personalities on MSNBC. The rev, the ed show, chris matthews, lawrence O'Donnell. They're all in prime time spots and they've talked my ear off on how they hate guns. Ed Schultz just had a pro-gun teacher on his show and devoured her with questions like "You think parents want you armed in a classroom with their children?" "You don't think the parents should know you have a gun??" and then even added his position as a parent saying "I would never want my child in a classroom with a gun." I am watching POLITICS NATION right now and the caption at the bottom has a picture of a gun and the words "OUT OF CONTROL!" next to it. Yea... they secretly love guns, you're right.

Like, I don't know if you're mentally handicapped or what but you are so, so off.

[gagaluna 0]

omg - - this thread....... :fail:

[Nissa 51]

According to your definition, Maddow falls right into primetime or she doesn't - most channels with a lot of original programming besides news (or non-cable channels in general) have 7-11 PM as primetime, some cable shows have 8-11 PM, news in general has 7-8:30 as its primetime. And what you're talking about is people not wanting to follow the NRA and arm schools with volunteers/teachers/janitors/principals to shoot possible mass murderers. The biggest idiot imaginable supports that (besides the NRA dared to propose this), or people lamenting what HAPPENED, or people thinking something needs to be done (as with your "OUT OF CONTROL!" headline) but are not talking about any tangible, sensible legislation because they can't go too far in talking about legislation or the 2nd Amendment itself - they are allowed to talk about any possible reason for gun crime (mental health, culture of violence, movies and/or video games, irresponsible owners, etc. etc. besides GUNS THEMSELVES. They can cry how there are mass murders like this are happening too much, but that does not change the fact they will be able to openly talk about legislation. And I'd HOPE so they were telling you guns are bad... :roll: If you can think a bit in terms of nuance, you know that I'm not talking about MSNBC folks screaming from the rooftops how pro-gun they are.

And I have had courses in, among other things, Comparative Media, Media and Public Perception in the US, Media in South Asia and North America, Perspectives in Television Media in Europe and the US, Persuasive Methodology in Television News in the 21st Century and The Evolution of American and European Television, dumbass. If you can't stop insulting my (and your own) intelligence just shut that damn mouth.

Like, I don't know if you're mentally handicapped or what but you are so, so off.

I'll just quote my last post: STOP THIS IDIOCY.

[mitchell 0]

It's not like the bra was desgined for the tour. She's worn it on multiple occasions including in the Alejandro video and on the cover of Rolling Stones. :fthis:

[Morphine Prince 96,178]

Lady Gaga is certainly no stranger to firing up controversy. And her latest outrageous outfit is no exception. At one point during her show in Vancouver, Canada, on Friday, Mother Monster stepped out sporting a bra adorned with two fake plastic assault rifles. Lady Gaga suffers wardrobe malfunction. Not surprising, the fashion choice has some folks questioning its appropriateness.

After all, just one day earlier, Vice President Joe Biden met with Congress and the NRA about how to curb gun violence in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., school massacre.

Source: http://www.eonline.c...ies&amp&amp

[Space Banana 0]

According to your definition, Maddow falls right into primetime or she doesn't - most channels with a lot of original programming besides news (or non-cable channels in general) have 7-11 PM as primetime, some cable shows have 8-11 PM, news in general has 7-8:30 as it's primetime. And what you're talking about is people not wanting to follow the NRA and arm schools with volunteers to shoot possible mass murderers. The biggest idiot imaginable supports that (besides the NRA dared to propose this), or people lamenting what HAPPENED, or people thinking something needs to happen but are not talking about any tangible, sensible legislation.

And I study, among other things, Comparative Media, Media and Public Perception in the US, Media in South Asia and North America, Impact on television news in the 21st century, dumbass. If you can't stop insulting my (and your own) intelligence just shut that damn mouth.

You still haven't address most of what I've brought up but ok... The Ed Show would then be considered prime time and competes directly with O'reilly. Ed recently said this "“Would it be a deterrent if, you know, say perpetrators know that there’s guns in the schools? How do we know they wouldn’t view that as a challenge? I mean, we got a goofy world out there. I’m just not convinced that packing a small firearm is the best defense or certainly not the best defense.

You know, you want to make the best defense? Make the school a damn fortress. I mean, you could do that, I mean but, is that reasonable? Is that the right thing to do? Is it necessary? […] haven’t we had enough school shootings where this is necessary? We’ve never had a civilian stop a shooting.†NOT EXACTLY PRO GUNS.. he literally said,

"We’ve never had a civilian stop a shooting."

............ stop trying to make **** more complicated than it is. Also, you never gave evidence (like i asked) for your "48% of MSNBC is owned by a gun manufacturer" claim

[Morphine Prince 96,178]

Oh lol. Didn't see this earlier :toofloppy:

[Jase 12,118]

Oh lol. Didn't see this earlier :toofloppy:

it's ok :P

[Morphine Prince 96,178]

Anyway, people need to stop b---hing about a show. It's a show and real life events should not have any effect on it as long as she is not directly offending anyone.

I'm awaiting the hate for this opinion. Already got it another thread. I'm ready.

[Dayman 5,903]

She has been using he gun bra for 3 years now. Are people stupid?

[phoenixxx 33]

She has been using he gun bra for 3 years now. Are people stupid?

why yes, yes they are...

[alffy74 53]

OMG there are guns in james bond movie. they should remove the movie from the theatre and they should ban violent movies and shows!!!

I bet more people have seen James Bond movie than Gaga's BTWB...

[Nissa 51]

You still haven't address most of what I've brought up but ok... The Ed Show would then be considered prime time and competes directly with O'reilly. Ed recently said this "“Would it be a deterrent if, you know, say perpetrators know that there’s guns in the schools? How do we know they wouldn’t view that as a challenge? I mean, we got a goofy world out there. I’m just not convinced that packing a small firearm is the best defense or certainly not the best defense.

You know, you want to make the best defense? Make the school a damn fortress. I mean, you could do that, I mean but, is that reasonable? Is that the right thing to do? Is it necessary? […] haven’t we had enough school shootings where this is necessary? We’ve never had a civilian stop a shooting.†NOT EXACTLY PRO GUNS.. he literally said,

"We’ve never had a civilian stop a shooting."

............ stop trying to make **** more complicated than it is. Also, you never gave evidence (like i asked) for your "48% of MSNBC is owned by a gun manufacturer" claim

If you can think a bit in terms of nuance, you know that I'm not talking about how MSNBC folks are forced to constantly scream from the rooftops how pro-gun they are. That's absolutely NOT what I was getting at at all , and you know that very well (reread my posts, please, if you do think that).

As for the world's second largest gun manufacturer? I'm talking about GE military, which owns 49%, even more than I stated previously, of NBC Universal of which MSNBC is a part - and almost fully owns the NBC channel/NBCsports as well (read more here and here, here and here - these are quick random links I googled). I learned this fact a few years ago in one of my comparative media textbooks. I'm getting my Masters in Behavioral Economics and Comparative Media and some of the courses I mentioned I've taken a while ago, but I thought this fact was so shocking it stayed with me. And as for me making things complicated? Bob Costas nearly lost his job a few weeks ago because he wanted gun control and said this much during intermissions at a game of football on NBC (talking about Jovan Belcher, who murdered his 22-year-old girlfriend and then committed suicide).