Where would she be?

Probably the same place she is now... not many pop stars have great sucess past age 40. And she isn't even doing that bad now... looking at her album sales, Damita Jo and 20 YO both were certified platinum in the US, and Discipline has sold nearly 500,000 in the US.. which isn't terrible considering her age and lack of tours/promotion. If anything, I think the Superbowl helped Damita Jo sell so well.

CrabalockerFishwife said:

Probably the same place she is now... not many pop stars have great sucess past age 40. And she isn't even doing that bad now... looking at her album sales, Damita Jo and 20 YO both were certified platinum in the US, and Discipline has sold nearly 500,000 in the US.. which isn't terrible considering her age and lack of tours/promotion. If anything, I think the Superbowl helped Damita Jo sell so well.

I agree. It would've been on the same wavelength as it is now. I do think that the Superbowl controversy helped Damita Jo sell and tank at that same time. Either way, Janet had alot of tough competition on her hands from many comtemporaries. We also have to admit that she didn't tour for Damita Jo or 20 Y.O. either, so that was a huge blow. By the time Discipline came out, things looked back up and then, it got shaky. I'm just happy that she has been able to venture back into film and took that hitaus from the music scene for a while. She has nothing to lose at this point in her career anyway.

I think it would be all about the way it is now.
In the U.S. ageism is very common.
Janet has never been very popular outside the U.S., let's be honest here.
If we look at Madonna, the peak of fame in the U.S. for her is long gone, the last really successful album in the United States - Music (2000), the last number 1 single, too, was 12 years ago. Her last two albums (Hard Candy and MDNA) have no big chances to ever reach platinum certification ... BUT Madonna has huge fan base outside the U.S., especially in Europe and Latin America (which is not and can not be at the Janet).
Female Artist after 40 years has very low chances to be very popular in the United States.

I never would have imagined Prince outselling her in 2004, even if through giveaways. DJ would have been double platinum with sales sightly over a million. And All nite should have been the first single

alphastreet said:

I never would have imagined Prince outselling her in 2004, even if through giveaways. DJ would have been double platinum with sales sightly over a million. And All nite should have been the first single

That's a very valid point. I think the main problems of Janet's later music career were record labels (industry), different production crews, ageism, and the everchanging of the musical landscape. If we look back at the Damita Jo era, everything seemed to come back to the Superbowl mishap and that was it. Alot of people weren't in Janet's favor at that time. It really doesn't matter if Prince outsold her or not or if the Superbowl incident hadn't occured, things were going to look differently for Janet. But then again, she had nothing to lose at that point. She had her golden period (peak)!

[Edited 6/10/12 6:45am]

Damita Jo - double platinum with 2 top top five hits. Maybe she would have followed it up with something better than 20 Y.O.

There's a misconception that the Super Bowl was the #1 factor into her downfall - no it wasn't. It was Virgin Records mismanaging her albums' promotion post-Velvet Rope (the promotion of All for You was good in the beginninng then it fell apart later in the year of its release) and then of course that inevitable age problem.

Timmy84 said:

There's a misconception that the Super Bowl was the #1 factor into her downfall - no it wasn't. It was Virgin Records mismanaging her albums' promotion post-Velvet Rope (the promotion of All for You was good in the beginninng then it fell apart later in the year of its release) and then of course that inevitable age problem.

Mismanagement and a series of identity issues. The tension was beginning to show near the end of The Velvet Rope run. The Super Bowl issue was something that the media and public used to further scrutinize Janet, but stuff started brewing before all of that. After all, 2001-2008 weren't exactly the best years for her professionally when it came to her music career.

silverchild said:

Timmy84 said:

There's a misconception that the Super Bowl was the #1 factor into her downfall - no it wasn't. It was Virgin Records mismanaging her albums' promotion post-Velvet Rope (the promotion of All for You was good in the beginninng then it fell apart later in the year of its release) and then of course that inevitable age problem.

Mismanagement and a series of identity issues. The tension was beginning to show near the end of The Velvet Rope run. The Super Bowl issue was something that the media and public used to further scrutinize Janet, but stuff started brewing before all of that. After all, 2001-2008 weren't exactly the best years for her professionally when it came to her music career.

Right. And you're right, the beginning of the end was definitely by the end of the Velvet Rope as far as Janet's substantial success with promo went. She had successful records after that but it was never to the same intensity it had been before.

Timmy84 said:

silverchild said:

Mismanagement and a series of identity issues. The tension was beginning to show near the end of The Velvet Rope run. The Super Bowl issue was something that the media and public used to further scrutinize Janet, but stuff started brewing before all of that. After all, 2001-2008 weren't exactly the best years for her professionally when it came to her music career.

Right. And you're right, the beginning of the end was definitely by the end of the Velvet Rope as far as Janet's substantial success with promo went. She had successful records after that but it was never to the same intensity it had been before.

Exactly. It's clear that All For You was designed solely as a pop record and she had a couple of hit singles that spun from it, but there was something off about the promotion. Same with Damita Jo and 20 Y.O. I still feel that the fault was solely in the hands of Janet and Virgin in misguiding the potentiality and impact those records after All For You could've had.

I always thought the biggest problem was Damita Jo album. The superbowl incident was just funny in europe, but she stopped selling with Damita Jo. It was just very boring and not good.

The first single of her albums were always big hits, but with Damita it flopped.

Maybe people didn't even know she had a new album, because I can't remember any promotion.

I still think Janet could be bigger right now than she is, but i'm not sure if she wants that. Her last albums all seem to miss a 'masterplan'. All of a sudden there's a book, there's movie, an album....but they have nothing to do with eachother. She starts a tour without an album.

Release the album AND the book AND tour at the same time....but like I said, maybe she doesn't want to.

Hudson said:

I think Janets career would be about the same but I think Damita Jo probably would have done better commercially if her record label managed it better and if she toured. Damita Jo was exactly alot better than what credits rated it.

At this point in Janets career, she has nothing to prove. She has done it all and she is still doing alot. Im glad she decided to do films again and she seems happy with where she is at which to me is most important.

There are a few elements to my answer:

1. Janet was 37 when the SuperBowl happened, so her time as a Top 40 radio staple was coming to a close regardless of the reaction to her stunt. However, I think Damita Jo, especially if released in its original form (rather than the rushed "censored" version of the album that Virgin forced her to slap together after the SB) would have sold much better, perhaps hitting 2-3 million in the USA, and generated several significant hits.

2. I think she would have toured with DJ (the big problem was finding a sponsor after the SB) and that would have kept her fanbase much more energized.

3. I think the follow-up albums would have been completely different than 20 YO and Discipline.

I think that had she stayed with Jimmy & Terry, she might have had SOME greater success, but I would also have to agree that the record companies pretty much just didn't back her like they should have. Music is music. Age is age. Who cares how old someone is? Can they sing? Do they have a pleasant voice and good material? Then who gives a fuck about their age? Look at Madonna. She's 53 goin' on 54 and STILL sellin' out tours. Same with Tina Turner. She's seventy-sumpthin' and could very easily fill an entire sports arena if she were 2 come out 2morrow and decide 2 go on tour. Ageism is created by people, not artists. It's bullshit, it's prejudice and it ain't rite.

whitechocolatebrotha said:

I think that had she stayed with Jimmy & Terry, she might have had SOME greater success, but I would also have to agree that the record companies pretty much just didn't back her like they should have. Music is music. Age is age. Who cares how old someone is? Can they sing? Do they have a pleasant voice and good material? Then who gives a fuck about their age? Look at Madonna. She's 53 goin' on 54 and STILL sellin' out tours. Same with Tina Turner. She's seventy-sumpthin' and could very easily fill an entire sports arena if she were 2 come out 2morrow and decide 2 go on tour. Ageism is created by people, not artists. It's bullshit, it's prejudice and it ain't rite.

I guess it could be better argued that it was really the direction of the music she was doing rather than her age.

Shucks when I think of Janet, I don't even think of the Superbowl incident. I've pretty much forgotten it until someone brings it up.

whitechocolatebrotha said:

I think that had she stayed with Jimmy & Terry, she might have had SOME greater success, but I would also have to agree that the record companies pretty much just didn't back her like they should have. Music is music. Age is age. Who cares how old someone is? Can they sing? Do they have a pleasant voice and good material? Then who gives a fuck about their age? Look at Madonna. She's 53 goin' on 54 and STILL sellin' out tours. Same with Tina Turner. She's seventy-sumpthin' and could very easily fill an entire sports arena if she were 2 come out 2morrow and decide 2 go on tour. Ageism is created by people, not artists. It's bullshit, it's prejudice and it ain't rite.

THIS! They really didn't know how to market Janet anymore because the youngings that were coming up were carbon copies. At the end, Janet kind've wallowed in following some trends, instead of reinventing the wheel as well. But, who can really argue with the fact an artist is putting out quality stuff 30+ years after her emergence?

Janet had stated on Access Hollywood in 2008 that the Pop (mainstream) department didn't want to support Damita Jo, 20 YO, and Discipline so that's one of the main reason it didn't perform as well commercially such as Control, RN1814, Janet, Velvet Rope, and All For You. The Urban department were the only ones promoting it. She had lots of plans following the release of Damita Jo, a tour was in the works but after nipplegate, no one wanted to sponser her, Then the first lady at the time Laura Bush spokes out against her superbowl performance, she was supposed to protray Lena Horne but then Lena changed her mind about Janet protraying her due to nipplegate. Another thing was she cancelled al ot of dates from her 2008 worldtour. so yeah the 2000's decade wasn't a great for Janet

another thing, its crazy how Janet got so much heat from her malfunction When Madonna purposely flashed hers yesterday and didn't get any outrage

Though some may choose to deny this, Madonna is and will always remain Pop’s greatest innovator, second only to Michael Jackson.

SNIP

This conversation is already taking place here.

http://prince.org/msg/8/382564

Is Madonna losing her shock value?

Just to add more fuel to the fire about the Superbowl controversy, it wasn't fair across the board. It certainly didn't hurt Justin Timberlake by a long shot. Another case of a gender and racial war or did it go haywire for Janet because she is a Jackson? I never thought about this until a couple years back, but we all know something else tumultuous was going on in Jackson ville....

silverchild said:

Just to add more fuel to the fire about the Superbowl controversy, it wasn't fair across the board. It certainly didn't hurt Justin Timberlake by a long shot. Another case of a gender and racial war or did it go haywire for Janet because she is a Jackson? I never thought about this until a couple years back, but we all know something else tumultuous was going on in Jackson ville....

Three things happened:

1.) It was a political year (hate those years since we're in one now lol).

2.) Michael had his court case developing then so this added more bad press to the family.

3.) Janet refused to apologize further than she did for it (I wished she hadn't apologized the first time).

She did stay with Jimmy & Terry.

The difference is, she didn't want to write.

Azz said:

She did stay with Jimmy & Terry.

The difference is, she didn't want to write.

Yep. That probably also led to Virgin releasing "Damita Jo" as fast as they did. It sounds technical what happened.

Timmy84 said:

silverchild said:

Just to add more fuel to the fire about the Superbowl controversy, it wasn't fair across the board. It certainly didn't hurt Justin Timberlake by a long shot. Another case of a gender and racial war or did it go haywire for Janet because she is a Jackson? I never thought about this until a couple years back, but we all know something else tumultuous was going on in Jackson ville....

Three things happened:

1.) It was a political year (hate those years since we're in one now lol).

2.) Michael had his court case developing then so this added more bad press to the family.

3.) Janet refused to apologize further than she did for it (I wished she hadn't apologized the first time).

Well put! Just not a good time at all. This truly marked a major crossroads not only for Michael and Janet, but for the entire Jackson clan. The fact that we were in a bad political year worsen stuff as well. Damn media...

silverchild said:

Timmy84 said:

Three things happened:

1.) It was a political year (hate those years since we're in one now lol).

2.) Michael had his court case developing then so this added more bad press to the family.

3.) Janet refused to apologize further than she did for it (I wished she hadn't apologized the first time).

Well put! Just not a good time at all. This truly marked a major crossroads not only for Michael and Janet, but for the entire Jackson clan. The fact that we were in a bad political year worsen stuff as well. Damn media...

Just remember the media was built for the purposes of building you up and tearing you down so the fall of Janet wasn't as stunning as it seemed. I agree it was pretty sad though.

I was six years old during the All For You era when I became a fan. I think I was obsessed with her and I became dedicated. When the Superbowl thing happened, I knew where I was and didn't think any less of her when the so called "incident" happened. Point is, I think her fanbase is loyal enough to stick by Janet no matter what happens and we knew she was sincere when she explained it all on Oprah 2006. So either way, her career would be the same.

God, I love Janet. <3