This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
VH1 Classic is showing a special on this (disappointing, so don't go out of your way to find it). They show the beginning as the 15 minute leadup and countdown for one of the space shuttle launches, before "Ladies and gentlemen, rock and roll!" and the original MTV theme song. I'm not going to edit this because because I can't verify whether the countdown occurred at 11:45
== MTV Programming on Sept 11, 2001? ==for 24 hours as part of the year's Hate Crimes awareness campaign.
Was this also totally not true on 9/11..? Didn't almost all networks and stations flip to some sort of news coverage? I remember seeing like MSNBC news on Bravo or something... MPScan
September 11th is, historically, a date synonymous with tragedy.
Beside the innumerable tragedies and acts of imperialism on the world stage attributed to this date, September 11th is notoriously bad for America. For example:
1857 - The Mountain Meadows Massacre in Utah 1919 - The US invades Honduras 2001 - The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon
and VERY tragically…
1970 - The Ford Pinto is introduced
Even Hollywood has been marred by this date. In 1921 Fatty Arbuckle was arrested for rape and then subsequently acquitted, although his career never recovered.
And now the coup de gras of all national and Hollywood tragedies proceeds tomorrow when "What Perez Sez" premieres on VH1.
God knows why shit-talking has become the leitmotif of E! and VH1, but with the introduction of an entire show centered around a talentless hack, it doesn't show any signs of changing.
Mario Armando Lavandeira Jr. (AKA Perez Hilton) has made his career waiting for miniscule celebrity screw-ups on which to inflate and then build his own reputation to make up for a failed career that actually would have required some sort of talent. Even the name, "Perez Hilton", is a novelty hack on the name of a talentless bitch that Lavandeira wishes he could be.
I'm not defending the celebrities Lavandeira skewers. Britney certainly wasn't in professional form. The VMA's certainly did suck all around. They sucked so bad that Alicia Keys finally had the chance to shine amidst more glamorous and popular hedonistic hollywood elitists (not to downplay the incredible performance by Chris Brown). Where I take issue with Lavandeira and his gossip predecessors, is that he is symptomatic of the plague that has infected the American psyche. We tune in to gossip shows to catch a glimpse of celebrities embarrassing themselves. The tabloids exist for this premise alone. Lavandeira is just the latest head popping up out of the hydra stump of gossip columnists who masquerade as being authorities on any topic. The most puke-inducing part of their form of celebrity is the undeserved air of accomplishment they take on. People take offense to the biased ramblings of puppet pundits like Anne Coulter, but we should truly be more concerned with the very existence of the phoney gossip elite. At least Coulter has an educated bias on real matters.
Funny enough, Lavandeira knows where his meals come from. He made the ludicrous claim that Britneys performance was disrespectful to MTV (Which owns VH1). Seriously dude, MTV is responsible, more than anyone else, for the destruction of any artistic merit in music today. They destroyed music so badly that it's hard to actually find music on Music Television, anymore.
How sad is it that after all is said and done, Justin Timberlake is the one with class amongst all these celebrities that are little more than persistent protoplasm? Do you realize how ridiculous that is? Justin Timberlake! He simultaneously paid homage to the great performers that preceded him while humbly acknowledging the talent displayed after Browns performance. Seriously folks! I feel violated acknowledging this.
Well Mario, good luck with your show. I'm sure the public can't wait for you to out another gay man who just wants to be left alone. We'll be watching with baited breath as you attack celebrity fashion choices that you couldn't afford (although judging by many of your photos, you're in no place to talk). And, of course, we can't wait to hear you criticize performances that you wish you had the gaul, talent, budget, acumen, and/or creativity to do yourself. The viewing audience will be there in their envy and jealousy of the celebrities they pay to hate. I can already hear the sound of billions of neurons dying as their synaptic charges die out. Perhaps your show gives credence to social darwinism. Apparently it's time to thin the herd for humanities survival.
Never mind, you don't need luck with your show. It'll do just fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.170.104.24 ( talk) 23:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
here in brazil they were sued in 2002 by an non-governmental organization, 'cause they put 180 frames of sadomasoquism and pedophilia in an add. and now they were sued once again 'cause of pedophilia in a mtv unpluggeed song, and the government obligated them to pass info about child sexual abbuse. ehere is a link in portuguese and at the bottom of tha page you can see 2 frames from the first add: http://www.mensagemsubliminar.com.br/noticias.php?action=view&id=NDUxMDYuNg==
==General== What nobody seemed to add to the article is the fact that MTV LATIN AMERICA completely replaced their programming on 9/11 to show live coverage of the events of that day.
Does the MTV Series box in this article also not render properly for other Firefox users? Remy B 07:52, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
How about an article about mtv censorship? An index about the banned videos and stuff life that?
Removed TRL from the list of shows - it's primarily a music/video show, which is different from the others in the list. (If you want to include them, it should be in a separate section along with Yo MTV Raps, Headbanger's Ball, etc.) Removed the name of the director of Video Killed the Radio Star (Russel Mulcahy). Not relevant enough to the MTV page. GGano
The criticism section is, as it stands, completely unfounded and could easily simply be the opinion of the writer. Would be useful to have some references. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:51, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
p.s. isn't it a little odd that this page has been moved back and forth at least three times, and yet there is no talk page discussion about the most appropiate name? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:51, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Page moved by User:YOMHER AGAIN without discussion, and moved back. Strong note left on his user page not to move it without discussion here. Arwel 22:09, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Is it really true that MTV started out as a rock music video station? I was under the impression that even in their early years they played a lot of pop--- Duran Duran, New Order, Madonna, and so on. -- Delirium 22:42, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
This entry could use the MTV logo... if there was permission to use it. Allyunion 10:44, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
How about a screenshot of the Moonman and the MTV flag
Hmmmm... anyone has suggestions about where to add the sockpuppets Zig & Zag? With the cartoons? SietskeEN 13:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I had noticed that there wasn't anything in the article about the
Superbowl XXXVIII
halftime show. As MTV produced the show, that should at least have some mention in there - regardless of how each person feels about the network and the show itself.
JesseG
20:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Anybody think including guest DJs would be a good idea? First one, I hear, was Adam Ant. (Personally, I could care less, but...) Trekphiler 08:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
As much as I agree with the criticisms of MTV, it does seem fairly biased. I love this article and agree with it entirely, but it appears to be extremely biased.
it seems to me that MTV critism should gert its own artical LOL( Esskater11 23:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC))
I am quite certain that there are a lot of people like me, who don't come accross as constipated conservative whiny parents that have a very different criticism of MTV. Like the opinion that MTV is basicaly one big machine to manipulate young people to buy things. Most of my friends have used drugs and I praise loose women that some foul tongues would desacrate as sluts. What I dislike is that MTV promotes a very damaging culture, a very bad way of dealing with people, friends, partners.
I am very sure many rock bands have expressed similar feelings.
For instance what does radio head have to say about MTV? Queens of the stoneage?
Though they are not institutions they most definitely are spokes people, and for that matter though I don't aggree with everyhing they say, you can count Radiohead as a spokesperson for me.
Guidocalvano 02:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Particularly in the "criticism" section. Every other word is "also." Kestrel 17:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
The above are examples of things that need citations. And when I mean citations, I mean more than just some bloke on an intenet forum saying 'MTV is shit because it no longer plays music.' Anon Dude 15:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Although MTV is shit because it no longer plays music, I also agree also that it also needs citations also. Kestrel 01:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
++The timeline seems totally arbitrary. Why should "eras" be split by odd years when no apparent change is detectable? To me the only clear changes were from all-music format to the current one. -
Plasticbadge
17:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
The Janet Jackson mention at the bottom of the racial discrimination has nothing to do with racial discrimination and should be moved elsewhere. -- Neilajh 23:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
The entire section is nothing but POV with nothing to substantiate its accusations. I've {{fact}} tagged every accusation, and if they are not substantiated, I'll remove them. User:Zoe| (talk) 21:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I've waited 5 days and it hasn't been sourced. I have removed the entire section. Source it and it can go back. User:Zoe| (talk) 04:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Many people as I do we think that MTV uses a very powerful weapon to hipnoze people. I mean, flashlights, constant camera moving and very much short scenes one each after the other. This form goes much more farther than the message within. And the message is just about offering to the young population everything they need to know for growing and living in the society. From what to do in the first date, when to feel proud, and when ashame, hopes and frustrations, and meybe this might be not really good for the person, ´cose, in other words, is not this way of producing really "brainwashing"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.57.64.235 ( talk • contribs) 13:55, 31 March 2007.
-- What in god's name are you talking about?? Keep off the drugs man! —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
209.173.211.254 (
talk •
contribs) 13:02, 31 May 2007.
Yeah I don't really follow you either but Im sure mtv does have brainwashing in it lol. (signed by some other guy that did not write the following)
If you take an approach based on plain business economics it isn't such a strange notion.
MTV makes money as a platform for commercials. Companies will use MTV as a platform if it is the most cost effective platform for motivating viewers to acquire the products they advertise. I do think that they have a strong incentive to enhance the effectiveness of advertisements. And this can be accomplished is by making their current audience more influentiable, for instance by using emotional vulnerabilities. Large numbers of the viewing population are quite young, maybe even in adolescence. By showing physically attractive people their wish to find partners is awakened, and with that their fear of rejection. These attractive people then preach how important it is to have material wealth. The next block presents to you the new fragrance from axe.
Another way to increase advertisement profit is to expand the total number of influentiable viewers. Just as a video of attractive people making materialist statements makes people more inclined to buy things, other statements can motivate people to change their attitudes to other people. TLC sings "I dont want no scrub". Aren't they implicitely stating that once you have bought the gear that makes you attractive you can demand that your boy friend also get a job to spend his money on MTV gear?
Just wathc the number of dating shows centering aroun money ("Can I come in?"), things (houses, products in "RoomRaiders"), fear of rejection (dismissed, next). Other recurring themes are hierarchy and power and how products and money achieve this (hip hop bling and videos, the fabulous life).
The final category of programming is about pain and humilation. Think of "Viva La Bam". I don't exactly get how this leads to advertisement revenues, but they are definitely not about building deep and strengthening friendships, or having beautifull feelings for ladies or gents.
And it is precisely these friendships and these ladies that make me content with life. Not a new pair of shoes or a diamond neckless.
They don't necessarily brainwash, but they do manipulate. Simply because that is what they are paid to do.
Guidocalvano 02:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
You're right. That would work eh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.89.42 ( talk) 04:37, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Earlier, user Esskater11 suggested that there be a separate page detailing the numerous criticisms against MTV. I agreed with the user, so I will create a page titled "Criticism of MTV". I believe that the creation of that page is warranted because Wikipedia has other "criticism" pages covering popular entertainment & other things. Those pages include but are not limited to: Criticism of Family Guy, Religious opposition to the Harry Potter series, South Park controversies, Fox News Channel controversies, Criticism of World of Warcraft and so forth. Some sources for such a page can be found within the "References" section of the main MTV article. I just wanted consensus over an agreement to create such a page. -- 71.135.180.154 19:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Has anyone heard of "i dont want my mtv," a project of standtrue? Im surprised nothing of this is included in this article. heres the link for the website —Preceding unsigned comment added by 07:10, 2 August 2007 ( talk • contribs) 24.36.89.104
The following paragraph within the 'Moral Influence on MTV' Section smacks of weaselry to me:
What sticks out to me would be the noun phrase "Focus on the Family, another pro-family group, …". Focus on the Family is (as described on its Wikipedia article) " … [a] promot[er of] … social conservative public policy." Focus on the Family is known primarily for its hardline stances on abortion and equal rights for homosexuals. As to how this translates into being "pro-family", search me—unless, of course, that's the latest in Newspeak for "we intend to suppress your civil liberties and rights in order to soothe our sadistic consciences". But I'm being acerbic: the point is, this noun phrase refers to Focus on the Family (and the American Family Association by retroactive inclusion) in a manner that many could interpret to mean, at its broadest: "support of families". This is not strictly true. Neither of these organizations support families which structures include same-sex couples. To my knowledge, it has not entered the vernacular lexicon to such an extent as comparable exemplars "pro-choice" or "pro-life", so its precise semantic content may not be immediately clear to a majority of readers, and this paragraph does not elucidate specifically what content aired on MTV to which such organizations object—namely, the attempted denial of homosexual citizens equality under the law (let us not forget that Viacom operates Logo through MTV). The phrase "pro-family" should either be qualified or replaced with a more accurate adjectival. SumeragiNoOnmyouji 04:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
One might consider using the term "socially conservative" to refer to groups like FOF and AFA that support regulation or self-regulation by broadcasters to minimize content that condones gay relationships, premarital sex, etc. Terms like "pro-family" might make sense if they are used in contexts where a group like FOF or AFA is describing itself, much like an anti-abortion group might describe itself as "pro-life", but like with the above criticism of the the term "pro-family" as possibly NPOV, a significant number of abortion rights activists and non-activists might question how appropriate or consistent their "pro-life" policies actually are, and so question the accuracy of the term "pro-life". There's also a term "traditional family" which may be more acceptable to socially conservative critiques, and at least as a historical term it's arguably NPOV. southern students for choice - abilene ( talk) 12:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
I came here looking for criticism on how MTV was recieved in the late 90s for ditching music & making reality shows a lingering trend, but all of it seems to have vanished. I don't see much if anything on international MTVs either. I know there's one in South Korea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.77.255 ( talk) 15:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
From what little I've seen of these two shows, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say "Fear Factor" is an imitator of "Fear". Besides being reality shows with "Fear" in the title, the two shows have distinctly different styles... in "Fear" the people are immersed into a situation with helmet-mounted cameras, whereas Fear Factor is a series of disconnected "games" shot conventionally. BinaryTed 16:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
The section on political influence makes it look like they only cared about the 2004 US presidential election. There should be some note reguarding previous elections, especially the 1992 presidential election, since the youth vote was heavily attributed to Clinton's win. ErikNY 15:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
To say that MTV "abandoned" music is a little bit extreme. No one would argue the shift in focus of MTV's programming, but there are shows dedicated to music videos, and music videos regularly play late at night.
No it's not, it's the truth. And how are artists (Yes the crappy ones they play on MTV) going to get recognized when they play late at night and maybe an hour during the day? -Saint Jimmy
While the article acknowledges that the network is no longer as popular as it once was, and also that it is frequently criticized for rarely playing music. What I don't get from the article is a clear explanation for why the network veered more and more away from videos towards non-music related shows that made it popular, and seems to be (from the criticism) what people want the network to be.
was it really? Realferrari 08:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
MTV has a parent corporation called MTV Networks, which owns comedy central. South Park is thus property of MTV Networks, but it isn't created by MTV.
Guidocalvano
01:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I heard from a guy I know who lived in Toronto for a time that MTV wanted to take over Much Music. I can't find a citation, but CHUM (Much Music owners) didn't want to become an MTV station. If anyone can find this information, then it would be good to put in the article. Mr. C.C. 07:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
MTV Networks bought up all music video stations on the public cable in the Netherlands.
Guidocalvano
01:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I remember MTV used to air a cartoon in which cute fuzzy animals ended up either mutilating themselves or killing each other. Anyone knows the name of this cartoon? -- TLW 13:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Happy Tree Friends, but I dont remember MTV showing it...
MTV isn't as nearly as good as BET. Whoever made that statement. -- So Fresh and So Clean_Wish U Was Me 22:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Removed the Panic at the Disco line under censorship. The word "god" is censored not becuase of it's religeous connotations, but rather the fact the "goddamn" (as in "goddamn door") is considered "inappropriate" (for taking the lord's name in vein) by Standards, but "damn" is acceptible to them.
All I have to say is the letter "M" is supposed to stand for MUSIC, man!!!
Yep. MTV is shit and worse, it brainwashes young people. Sad.
Thank you! MTV is shit, it started off pretty well but now with all this hip-hop/rap/r&b shit, it just sucks. Everything on MTV sucks, and yet it still manages to be one of the highest rated networks on TV. Disgusting how so many people can like this...--
FloydZeppelin74
20:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
The most important part of MTV's critique are the videos and the clothing of the artist there. their it may influence the changes in lifestyle of the youth. Also maybe expand into the social and educational influence that MTV imposes among the youth of America.
I read in this article that the president of MTV is Christina Norman, but this article says it's Tom Freston. I'd change it, but I want to check here to make sure I'm not missing some organizational subtlety. -- Allen 06:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I love how someone created a redirect for Empty-V to this page! I found it funny and relavent. Darwin's Bulldog 04:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Among the things to do:
-- Samvscat 08:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, I did just about all of those things... if anyone has a problem with it, let me know. -- Samvscat 13:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This list was in the article; I removed it because I don't think it's relevant enough to be in the article, and I put all the other lists into their own articles. However, I think someone would nominate this for deletion if I made an article for it. So, here it is... Top videos on music.mtv.com per year, 8/1/2006
-- Samvscat 05:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Can someone clarify the following paragraph please? Where does the disparity between the "official" and "actual" figure come from? The immediate impact statement doesn't make any sense to me, is it trying to state that 6 people would be gathered around the TV for every "subscriber"? I'm afraid that I don't know enough about the channel history to correct this paragraph. Camw 05:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't Yo, MTV Raps at least be listed in the section MTV comes of age - Format evolution? -- Kyebaush 15:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
This page seems to have a lot of vandalism which I can't clean-up, as a new user. Would someone else mind doing it? 24.1.49.178 21:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Thats all folks
From Nov. 25, 2006 to July 15, 2007 this page was "semi-protected" due to vandalism. On July 17, a few days after semi-protection was lifted, there were two instances of IP vandalism [2] [3], which might signal that this page might need semi-protection again. -- Andrewlp1991 19:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:Mtvmid90s.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
When they first started they wouldn't air videos featureing african american performers. They didn't play any tell record companies threaten a boycott. Seems like a pretty important part of their history. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.27.168.204 ( talk • contribs) 22:44, 12 June 2007.
Today i noticed in the history that someone removed the petition against MTV regarding Janet Jackson's limited airplay. That petition can be found www [dot] petitiononline [dot] com [forward slash] JanMTV06 [forward slash] petition [dot] html. The reason for removal was "Petitiononline links are no good. If the petitions make the news, cite a news source for it. If not, it's not notable. There's never a reason to link to a petition)". However, since the petition has 5,000 sigs, I say it's notable, and does every petition or anything online have to have made the news in order for it to be worthy on Wikipedia? BTW I was the one who added it originally when I was adding sources for the "Controversy" section. Andrewlp1991 03:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't see anything on the talk page justifying the page's protected status. Should this be unprotected? 71.238.246.189 18:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Why is this not mentioned anywhere? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.179.223.76 ( talk • contribs) 13:16, 22 July 2007.
MTV debuted in 1981 and can there for not be the culprit John jarrell 17:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Radiohead is in my opinion quite alive, so are Smashing Pumpkins and Rage Against the Machine (ok maybe the last one fell apart but still). If you want to hear good rock ask your friends.
But on another note. It is amazing how they are quite fond of airing corrupt "punk" bands. The rock is corrupt only about half of the times and is in this respect quite impressive. It is unsetteling though that they apparently manage to get commercials income out of these non corrupt rock bands (or manage to achieve some tactical goal some future commercial money depends on) Guidocalvano 01:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I have added some details about his 1990`s videos its quite possible to say he was still the biggest star in the planet up until the mid 90`s and had some record breaking videos which can be mentioned, his impact on MTV was a lot longer than the thriller album. Realist2 13:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Does the new style song credits look anything like the European counterparts? Cos I don't understand by "larger full-screen font". If anyone has a screenshot, I'd be pleased to see it. 77.97.245.64 08:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)DanZieBoy
There's something wrong with the third paragraph of Previous concepts:
"MTV's programming format was created to control the minds of teenage America.[2] Pittman had test driven the music format by producing and hosting a 15 minute show, Album Tracks, on WNBC, New York, in the late 1970s. Pittman's boss, WASEC COO John Lack, had shepherded a TV series called PopClips, created by former Monkee-turned solo artist Michael Nesmith, the latter of whom by the late 1970s was turning his attention to the music video format.[3]"
Yeah, that first sentence sounds a little dubious too, but who's Pittman? There's no mention of a Pittman anywhere else in the article! 88.114.147.214 23:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Do you think we should feature who is the president of MTV? Van Toffler is the current president of the MTV empire right now. I think he should be mentioned in the info box. Nocarsgo ( talk) 01:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I love MTV! (Hey does anybody want to cite this for me? I dont know how, if you would do it, that would be awsome!! Thank you!!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.159.219 ( talk) 19:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for signing it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.159.219 ( talk) 19:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The MTV.COM web site. This must be some of the earliest commercial web sites EVER! No I'm not on crack. I watched mtv.com on a NCSA Mosaic browser back in late 1994 (or early 1995)! MTV was very early on the web; hence we should give an overview about the first web site launch of MTV. Would interest a lot of people, I suppose. [edit] Found some more stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curry#The_Web_and_MTV.com and http://groups.google.com/group/alt.folklore.urban/browse_thread/thread/51d41f9e26a69bf5/b50358df1931f955?hl=en&q=insubject%3Amtv.com&lnk=ol& -andy 85.179.223.255 ( talk) 18:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
A merge shouldn't happen at all. Now that we have criticism and censorship articles, the section is finally balanced. I'm removing the merge tag. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 10:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The above says it all. This article is a bit to extenstive to hold some peoples interest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paycheckgurl ( talk • contribs) 02:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted in the MTV wikipedia page that there is a formal petition to have MTV Networks change the name of their most carried channels: MTV (abbr.-Music Television) and VH1 (abbr.-Video Hits 1) to something more fitting to their programming. Neither channel plays music videos except for maybe less than 5% of their time, and there are channels that do have the MTV and VH1 name that actually do play music videos and video performances: what is now MTV Hits and VH1 Classic. The formal petition was cited here, but because the main website that it's being hosted on is on wikipedia's blacklist page, until formal notice you'll have to find it via a search engine. Surelock22 ( talk) 14:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I have discovered a mistake under the title, "Original VJs and Format". Someone, in their infinite wisdom, has locked this article and made it uneditable.
The mistake is the band name "Rolling Stones." The name of the band is "The Rolling Stones" and this section should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.43.126 ( talk) 23:15, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
MTV should become more minimalistic like the cool Rage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.130.136.199 ( talk) 23:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
MTV Games redirects here, but is not mentioned in article. Fail. Mathiastck ( talk) 21:33, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
98.208.203.223 added this content to the article. It's an interesting story, but it's totally unsourced and not written in wiki style at all. I don't know what else to do with it so I'm putting it here. Anyone want to try and edit it? -- Samvscat ( talk) 03:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Maybe they're covered in a subarticle?, the early MTV art breaks, short avante garde videos that were neither music videos nor station IDs. Would be nice to have a mention of them at least, though it's a fairly long article presently. Will look for sources. Шизомби ( talk) 23:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
At the time of writing (June 2009) there are two sections in the article both labelled "Recent Programming" neither of which is actually recent, one referring to 2007 and the other 2008. The idea of recent is entirely subjective. What was recent to the writer may not be recent to the reader, and as time passes it will inevitably no longer be recent. Better to phrase it differently or to use a specific time frame such as "MTV since 2007" and avoid writing the requires lots of maintenance. -- Horkana ( talk) 18:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
it is important to note that MTV was originally created for the sole purpose of watching music videos. Today, however, it has evolved into a comedy/ reality TV headquarters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.119.140.242 ( talk) 22:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Reading through the article, it seems like there is a lot of praise for MTV without even mentioning a single bit of the large deal of criticism the channel has against it. Also, there are some phrases have been tweaked to make MTV seem like a 'moral champion' when in fact they are nothing more than shutting out opposing views. I changed "anti-religious bigotry" to "anti-religious themes", trying to find a neutral phrase for the censorship. Ftc08 ( talk) 17:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Although the introduction makes a passing reference to the impact of MTV on the music industry, the article itself doesn't really get into the subject. It needs a section devoted to the topic, which could include the remarkable effect that MTV had on the sales of an industry that was then in the doldrums, how MTV (arguably) gave rise to such genres as hair metal, and the like. It should be researched and written by somebody more knowledgeable than me. -- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 11:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
The moral influence section deals with controversies that MTV has either been involved in or created. Since a controversy section is not foreign to a plethora of Wikipedia pages, and a controversy section can be created/modified in a neutral manner, this particular section should be re-titled " Controversy " Moreover, there is no other controversial show currently on MTV as infamous as Jersey Shore. The amount of criticism the show has received from national Italian American groups and news in conjunction with the amount of press releases the network has generated in defense of the show is well documented via print ads and news videos. Both of these aspects should be included in a Jersey Shore subtopic under a topic heading of "Controversy" to relay a neutral, yet fact specific account of this current occurrence with MTV. If there is no objection to this in the next day or so, I will go forward with incorporating this idea into the article. -- Accountable1 ( talk) 20:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
MTV:Lanched 2000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.82.164.170 ( talk) 03:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change 10 on Top beginning date from August 2010 to May 2010, because that is the month Lenay started 10 on Top. Source: I am her dad.
Olsent1 ( talk) 19:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
hi. can anybody use below page on this article. it about michael jackson.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/story/2011-11-24/mtv-oral-history-book/50896190/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahroozporia ( talk • contribs) 06:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article, File:MTV-FEAR PILOT.GIF, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 09:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
when were blacks ever banned from MTV? if there was never a ban, then how could there have been a barrier? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 04:31, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Uh, dude, there was never a policy that they would not play videos with blacks in them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 00:07, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
There was never a policy explicitly stating so, but that doesn't mean that MTV execs didn't turn a blind eye to black artists pre-Michael Jackson. Just so you know, you can discriminate without being blatantly obvious about it. 24.189.87.160 ( talk) 04:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
your assertion proves nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 16:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
it is nonsense that MTV, an organization created to make money, would turn a "blind eye" to music that could have made them more money. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk • contribs)
From the article:
"The former president of CBS Records, Walter Yetnikoff, remembered with scorn that MTV would not play "Billie Jean" or "Beat It" because it billed itself as a rock station.
Looking back on that era, a 1991 Los Angeles Times article quoted MTV founder and then-CEO Robert Pittman as saying the channel's format didn't lend itself to other musical styles, including R&B and country. And Pittman accused his critics of attempting to impose their musical pluralism on the channel's die-hard rock fans.
But Yetnikoff said he threatened to pull videos of his other artists unless MTV played Jackson's videos. Watch Yetnikoff talk about getting Jackson's videos played »
Soon Jackson's videos were heavily in rotation on MTV. Showcasing a black artist paved the way for the popular show, "Yo! MTV Raps," and other black artists, Neal said.
In turn, Jackson became one of the first African-Americans to be a global icon.
He also influenced a new generation of black musicians, including Usher, Ne-Yo and Kanye West, according to Joycelyn Wilson, a professor of African-American studies at Morehouse College, who specializes in popular culture and hip-hop studies."
I've got veritable proof to back up my "assertion". Try countering that. 24.189.87.160 ( talk) 21:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
if it billed itself as a rock station then maybe that is why they wouldn't play good old pedophile Mike's records? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 23:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
"It was really Prince who opened the door for Michael and not the other way around".
Sorry, but who's trying to rewrite history now? Not even die-hard Prince fans spew such nonsense. 24.189.87.160 ( talk) 08:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Was it The Young Ones like i'm often told, or was this just the UK version?-- 92.237.91.201 ( talk) 21:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
These list old websites of MTV shows WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I was doing some research around MTV and found a discrepancy.
- This entry says MTV debuted on August 1, 1980 - However, the "video killed the radio star" entry (and the source cited within this article) says it debuted on August 1, 1981
Which is correct?
Hoppy44 ( talk) 02:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC) Hoppy44, 11-30-2012 (be kind and apologies for wrong format or etiquette, first post ever on Wikipedia)
Under Launch/Previous Concepts... the text begins: "Pittman's boss, WASEC Executive Vice President John Lac...".
Who the heck is Pittman??? There is nothing that identifies this man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.248.6 ( talk) 04:09, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I wondered the same. He's identified later as the "programming chief, Robert W. Pittman" — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
176.25.6.46 (
talk)
22:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I noticed there is no mention of Disney's Fantasia being an influence or previous concept similar to the mtv concept. Fantasia predates the ones mentioned in this section as of this date. 71.3.104.21 ( talk) 06:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Previously, the article stated that MTV was launched in 1980, even though the source says 81, and that was in fact the actual year. Just changed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTCBlues ( talk • contribs) 16:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
MTV. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
This article reads like a freakin advert for mtv.. Nothing about the founder or his cia connection. Nothing about the occult symbolism... Nothing about nothing.. wikipeda stinks to high heaven, no wonder why you have to rattle you can for money every year...
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.89.152.78 ( talk) 22:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Warner Bros did. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
79.21.115.55 (
talk)
11:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
There should be a section that goes in depth about how MTV has shifted most of its music video and music show programming to secondary channels called MTV Hits and MTV Live (formerly Palladia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctrg298 ( talk • contribs) 03:54, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
I added MTV's 1985 safe-sex campaign which still exists today as Its Your Sex Life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susannabananna ( talk • contribs) 14:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The MTV Article has biased wording stated in it. I have removed the biased wording because MTV is relevant in their target audience. Just because ratings are falling does not mean they are not relevant anymore. MTV has a large following presence on social media and receive great interactions on there from viewers. Nielson ratings also fails to capture the amount of viewers for new episodes of shows through services like Hulu, Netflix and also from the MTV App. I believe the article is just fine with describing the current ratings fall that MTV is having as it is restructuring itself with different programming and destinations for people to watch content live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctrg298 ( talk • contribs) 03:30, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I noticed that sometime in December 2016, music feed was no longer airing on MTV. Upon checking my program guide then later verifying it with the TV schedule on mtv.com. Music feed does not air for the next two weeks, therefore based on this it is safe to say that MTV no longer shows music videos. So stop reverting my edits.
www.mtv.com/tv-schedule — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:C701:AB71:592F:E227:8502:E82E ( talk) 19:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
The addition of this show would be good to have here. Or does it not count because it was syndicated and not network like "Friday Night Videos" [1] on NBC? [2] 67.81.235.93 ( talk) 18:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_14_110/ai_n16807343/pg_1?tag=artBody%3Bcol1When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:47, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://mtvpress.com/press/release/its_an_fn_mtv_summer/{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://blog.tylerc.com/post/22264141144/more-adds-loose-ends-and-lament{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.realitytvmagazine.com/blog/2007/12/20/tila-tequila-goes-for-the-guy/{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mtvca/tvshows/show.jhtml?id=22413When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:34, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://living.scotsman.com/music.cfm?id=854582006{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.tvacres.com/censorship_beavis.htmWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:54, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
The article head fails to convey that MTV had a huge influence in the early 1990s for all of pop and rock music, and that not one current day 12 year old has ever heard about it. It was everything then, nothing now. I would like a contrasting description towards that direction. Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.138.189.193 ( talk) 23:31, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Last time I saw MTV change their logo, it was back in 2009. Or was it 2008? I don't think MTV's new logo debuted in 2010, it must've debuted in 2008 or 2009.-- 67.226.16.44 ( talk) 16:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Some of the wording in this section seems off, I'm not really sure what it's saying. Not sure if it's vandalism that's not been cleared up but thought I'd note it here. Alduin2000 ( talk) 00:25, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
MTV orchestrated the switch from Pop-metal to Alternative, they didn't follow it. The article gives the impression that MTV was merely responding to a change in popular taste rather than facilitating it. Mention should be made of MTV's power to dictate trends via video airplay policies, examples of such (including the intentional creation of one-hit wonders by refusing to air follow-up videos) and when they had reached a level of influence enabling them to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:87F:FE77:BD59:F18:EE5A:4BBC ( talk) 07:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Removed a lot of extra/unsourced info and added in sources where needed. Removed the refimprove tag for this section! Balle010 ( talk) 16:59, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Streamlined sections pertaining to MTV's history. Since the Nickelodeon page spun off its History section into another article called History of Nickelodeon, I suggest someone do the same with MTV as the article has become cluttered. MarcoPolo250 ( talk) 19:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Cory Doctorow wrote in 2001 that MTV ditched music videos due to the difficulty of generating Nielsen ratings for them. I'm having trouble verifying this elsewhere, though it's reasonable to think MTV wouldn't want to discuss this publicly. Maybe it was just an urban legend circulating almost 20 years ago, but since it wasn't just anyone making the claim, I thought I'd leave a note here in case someone wants to pick up the trail. -- BDD ( talk) 18:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
If people think Nickelodeon was first founded in 1977 as "Pinwheel", then MTV was first founded in 1977 as "Sight on Sound". — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChowderRulez ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
That is mentioned in the article. Beamsprout ( talk) 18:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Please stop changing the short description to say "pay TV". As noted by Yoshiman6464 in revision 1009761041, MTV is a cable network. pay television is a premium channel that requires a subscription, like HBO and Showtime. MTV does not fall under that category. If you have evidence that says otherwise I'm happy to look at it, but I'm currently certain that calling MTV "pay TV" is factually incorrect. Jkmartindale ( talk) 18:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
I reverted a section about censorship that was added by an IP. It was copied from Censorship on MTV without attribution and no sources were provided. No problem if someone cleans it up and sources it before re-adding. — Alexis Jazz ( talk or ping me) 21:47, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
As the history of the network has taken up half of the article, I suggest spinning off it and other sections into their own pages and keep the main article focused on the core network itself. Thecleanerand ( talk) 00:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
This article claims "During MTV's first few years, very few black artists were featured. The select few in MTV's rotation were ..." then proceeds to list off FOURTEEN different black artists that received regular airplay. Having been an actual MTV viewer during those days, I know there was far more than that. This claim is a crock of shit. 2604:2D80:4080:9500:502E:C616:28B2:66E1 ( talk) 23:28, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello editors, my name is Adriane and I work for MTV Entertainment Group. I'm hoping we can update this article so that it's more accurate and complete, but I know I can't make any of those edits directly and I want to make sure I follow all the conflict of interest rules. So to that end, I was hoping someone might be able to help me with updating the listed CEO in the infobox? MTV's President and CEO is Chris McCarthy. That's listed in this source.
I've also got some additional sourcing related to Mr. McCarthy heading the network, including this story from Adweek and this one from Variety. Maybe we could turn that into a sentence in the article introduction, something like:
References
Please let me know what you think and if we can make that update. Thanks in advance for your help! ABrownMTVE ( talk) 00:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Why no mention of Jackass in the entire article? MTV still owns this popular franchise. And there should be a description of the controversy with Senator Joe Lieberman over MTV's original Jackass series in 2001, in the Controversies section. 174.214.16.149 ( talk) 17:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Why does this article introduce MTV as a music video channel? MTV describes itself (more accurately) as reality shows and celebrity news. Worldbook1967 ( talk) 06:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
VH1 Classic is showing a special on this (disappointing, so don't go out of your way to find it). They show the beginning as the 15 minute leadup and countdown for one of the space shuttle launches, before "Ladies and gentlemen, rock and roll!" and the original MTV theme song. I'm not going to edit this because because I can't verify whether the countdown occurred at 11:45
== MTV Programming on Sept 11, 2001? ==for 24 hours as part of the year's Hate Crimes awareness campaign.
Was this also totally not true on 9/11..? Didn't almost all networks and stations flip to some sort of news coverage? I remember seeing like MSNBC news on Bravo or something... MPScan
September 11th is, historically, a date synonymous with tragedy.
Beside the innumerable tragedies and acts of imperialism on the world stage attributed to this date, September 11th is notoriously bad for America. For example:
1857 - The Mountain Meadows Massacre in Utah 1919 - The US invades Honduras 2001 - The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon
and VERY tragically…
1970 - The Ford Pinto is introduced
Even Hollywood has been marred by this date. In 1921 Fatty Arbuckle was arrested for rape and then subsequently acquitted, although his career never recovered.
And now the coup de gras of all national and Hollywood tragedies proceeds tomorrow when "What Perez Sez" premieres on VH1.
God knows why shit-talking has become the leitmotif of E! and VH1, but with the introduction of an entire show centered around a talentless hack, it doesn't show any signs of changing.
Mario Armando Lavandeira Jr. (AKA Perez Hilton) has made his career waiting for miniscule celebrity screw-ups on which to inflate and then build his own reputation to make up for a failed career that actually would have required some sort of talent. Even the name, "Perez Hilton", is a novelty hack on the name of a talentless bitch that Lavandeira wishes he could be.
I'm not defending the celebrities Lavandeira skewers. Britney certainly wasn't in professional form. The VMA's certainly did suck all around. They sucked so bad that Alicia Keys finally had the chance to shine amidst more glamorous and popular hedonistic hollywood elitists (not to downplay the incredible performance by Chris Brown). Where I take issue with Lavandeira and his gossip predecessors, is that he is symptomatic of the plague that has infected the American psyche. We tune in to gossip shows to catch a glimpse of celebrities embarrassing themselves. The tabloids exist for this premise alone. Lavandeira is just the latest head popping up out of the hydra stump of gossip columnists who masquerade as being authorities on any topic. The most puke-inducing part of their form of celebrity is the undeserved air of accomplishment they take on. People take offense to the biased ramblings of puppet pundits like Anne Coulter, but we should truly be more concerned with the very existence of the phoney gossip elite. At least Coulter has an educated bias on real matters.
Funny enough, Lavandeira knows where his meals come from. He made the ludicrous claim that Britneys performance was disrespectful to MTV (Which owns VH1). Seriously dude, MTV is responsible, more than anyone else, for the destruction of any artistic merit in music today. They destroyed music so badly that it's hard to actually find music on Music Television, anymore.
How sad is it that after all is said and done, Justin Timberlake is the one with class amongst all these celebrities that are little more than persistent protoplasm? Do you realize how ridiculous that is? Justin Timberlake! He simultaneously paid homage to the great performers that preceded him while humbly acknowledging the talent displayed after Browns performance. Seriously folks! I feel violated acknowledging this.
Well Mario, good luck with your show. I'm sure the public can't wait for you to out another gay man who just wants to be left alone. We'll be watching with baited breath as you attack celebrity fashion choices that you couldn't afford (although judging by many of your photos, you're in no place to talk). And, of course, we can't wait to hear you criticize performances that you wish you had the gaul, talent, budget, acumen, and/or creativity to do yourself. The viewing audience will be there in their envy and jealousy of the celebrities they pay to hate. I can already hear the sound of billions of neurons dying as their synaptic charges die out. Perhaps your show gives credence to social darwinism. Apparently it's time to thin the herd for humanities survival.
Never mind, you don't need luck with your show. It'll do just fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.170.104.24 ( talk) 23:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
here in brazil they were sued in 2002 by an non-governmental organization, 'cause they put 180 frames of sadomasoquism and pedophilia in an add. and now they were sued once again 'cause of pedophilia in a mtv unpluggeed song, and the government obligated them to pass info about child sexual abbuse. ehere is a link in portuguese and at the bottom of tha page you can see 2 frames from the first add: http://www.mensagemsubliminar.com.br/noticias.php?action=view&id=NDUxMDYuNg==
==General== What nobody seemed to add to the article is the fact that MTV LATIN AMERICA completely replaced their programming on 9/11 to show live coverage of the events of that day.
Does the MTV Series box in this article also not render properly for other Firefox users? Remy B 07:52, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
How about an article about mtv censorship? An index about the banned videos and stuff life that?
Removed TRL from the list of shows - it's primarily a music/video show, which is different from the others in the list. (If you want to include them, it should be in a separate section along with Yo MTV Raps, Headbanger's Ball, etc.) Removed the name of the director of Video Killed the Radio Star (Russel Mulcahy). Not relevant enough to the MTV page. GGano
The criticism section is, as it stands, completely unfounded and could easily simply be the opinion of the writer. Would be useful to have some references. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:51, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
p.s. isn't it a little odd that this page has been moved back and forth at least three times, and yet there is no talk page discussion about the most appropiate name? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:51, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Page moved by User:YOMHER AGAIN without discussion, and moved back. Strong note left on his user page not to move it without discussion here. Arwel 22:09, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Is it really true that MTV started out as a rock music video station? I was under the impression that even in their early years they played a lot of pop--- Duran Duran, New Order, Madonna, and so on. -- Delirium 22:42, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
This entry could use the MTV logo... if there was permission to use it. Allyunion 10:44, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
How about a screenshot of the Moonman and the MTV flag
Hmmmm... anyone has suggestions about where to add the sockpuppets Zig & Zag? With the cartoons? SietskeEN 13:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I had noticed that there wasn't anything in the article about the
Superbowl XXXVIII
halftime show. As MTV produced the show, that should at least have some mention in there - regardless of how each person feels about the network and the show itself.
JesseG
20:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Anybody think including guest DJs would be a good idea? First one, I hear, was Adam Ant. (Personally, I could care less, but...) Trekphiler 08:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
As much as I agree with the criticisms of MTV, it does seem fairly biased. I love this article and agree with it entirely, but it appears to be extremely biased.
it seems to me that MTV critism should gert its own artical LOL( Esskater11 23:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC))
I am quite certain that there are a lot of people like me, who don't come accross as constipated conservative whiny parents that have a very different criticism of MTV. Like the opinion that MTV is basicaly one big machine to manipulate young people to buy things. Most of my friends have used drugs and I praise loose women that some foul tongues would desacrate as sluts. What I dislike is that MTV promotes a very damaging culture, a very bad way of dealing with people, friends, partners.
I am very sure many rock bands have expressed similar feelings.
For instance what does radio head have to say about MTV? Queens of the stoneage?
Though they are not institutions they most definitely are spokes people, and for that matter though I don't aggree with everyhing they say, you can count Radiohead as a spokesperson for me.
Guidocalvano 02:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Particularly in the "criticism" section. Every other word is "also." Kestrel 17:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
The above are examples of things that need citations. And when I mean citations, I mean more than just some bloke on an intenet forum saying 'MTV is shit because it no longer plays music.' Anon Dude 15:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Although MTV is shit because it no longer plays music, I also agree also that it also needs citations also. Kestrel 01:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
++The timeline seems totally arbitrary. Why should "eras" be split by odd years when no apparent change is detectable? To me the only clear changes were from all-music format to the current one. -
Plasticbadge
17:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
The Janet Jackson mention at the bottom of the racial discrimination has nothing to do with racial discrimination and should be moved elsewhere. -- Neilajh 23:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
The entire section is nothing but POV with nothing to substantiate its accusations. I've {{fact}} tagged every accusation, and if they are not substantiated, I'll remove them. User:Zoe| (talk) 21:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I've waited 5 days and it hasn't been sourced. I have removed the entire section. Source it and it can go back. User:Zoe| (talk) 04:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Many people as I do we think that MTV uses a very powerful weapon to hipnoze people. I mean, flashlights, constant camera moving and very much short scenes one each after the other. This form goes much more farther than the message within. And the message is just about offering to the young population everything they need to know for growing and living in the society. From what to do in the first date, when to feel proud, and when ashame, hopes and frustrations, and meybe this might be not really good for the person, ´cose, in other words, is not this way of producing really "brainwashing"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.57.64.235 ( talk • contribs) 13:55, 31 March 2007.
-- What in god's name are you talking about?? Keep off the drugs man! —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
209.173.211.254 (
talk •
contribs) 13:02, 31 May 2007.
Yeah I don't really follow you either but Im sure mtv does have brainwashing in it lol. (signed by some other guy that did not write the following)
If you take an approach based on plain business economics it isn't such a strange notion.
MTV makes money as a platform for commercials. Companies will use MTV as a platform if it is the most cost effective platform for motivating viewers to acquire the products they advertise. I do think that they have a strong incentive to enhance the effectiveness of advertisements. And this can be accomplished is by making their current audience more influentiable, for instance by using emotional vulnerabilities. Large numbers of the viewing population are quite young, maybe even in adolescence. By showing physically attractive people their wish to find partners is awakened, and with that their fear of rejection. These attractive people then preach how important it is to have material wealth. The next block presents to you the new fragrance from axe.
Another way to increase advertisement profit is to expand the total number of influentiable viewers. Just as a video of attractive people making materialist statements makes people more inclined to buy things, other statements can motivate people to change their attitudes to other people. TLC sings "I dont want no scrub". Aren't they implicitely stating that once you have bought the gear that makes you attractive you can demand that your boy friend also get a job to spend his money on MTV gear?
Just wathc the number of dating shows centering aroun money ("Can I come in?"), things (houses, products in "RoomRaiders"), fear of rejection (dismissed, next). Other recurring themes are hierarchy and power and how products and money achieve this (hip hop bling and videos, the fabulous life).
The final category of programming is about pain and humilation. Think of "Viva La Bam". I don't exactly get how this leads to advertisement revenues, but they are definitely not about building deep and strengthening friendships, or having beautifull feelings for ladies or gents.
And it is precisely these friendships and these ladies that make me content with life. Not a new pair of shoes or a diamond neckless.
They don't necessarily brainwash, but they do manipulate. Simply because that is what they are paid to do.
Guidocalvano 02:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
You're right. That would work eh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.89.42 ( talk) 04:37, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Earlier, user Esskater11 suggested that there be a separate page detailing the numerous criticisms against MTV. I agreed with the user, so I will create a page titled "Criticism of MTV". I believe that the creation of that page is warranted because Wikipedia has other "criticism" pages covering popular entertainment & other things. Those pages include but are not limited to: Criticism of Family Guy, Religious opposition to the Harry Potter series, South Park controversies, Fox News Channel controversies, Criticism of World of Warcraft and so forth. Some sources for such a page can be found within the "References" section of the main MTV article. I just wanted consensus over an agreement to create such a page. -- 71.135.180.154 19:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Has anyone heard of "i dont want my mtv," a project of standtrue? Im surprised nothing of this is included in this article. heres the link for the website —Preceding unsigned comment added by 07:10, 2 August 2007 ( talk • contribs) 24.36.89.104
The following paragraph within the 'Moral Influence on MTV' Section smacks of weaselry to me:
What sticks out to me would be the noun phrase "Focus on the Family, another pro-family group, …". Focus on the Family is (as described on its Wikipedia article) " … [a] promot[er of] … social conservative public policy." Focus on the Family is known primarily for its hardline stances on abortion and equal rights for homosexuals. As to how this translates into being "pro-family", search me—unless, of course, that's the latest in Newspeak for "we intend to suppress your civil liberties and rights in order to soothe our sadistic consciences". But I'm being acerbic: the point is, this noun phrase refers to Focus on the Family (and the American Family Association by retroactive inclusion) in a manner that many could interpret to mean, at its broadest: "support of families". This is not strictly true. Neither of these organizations support families which structures include same-sex couples. To my knowledge, it has not entered the vernacular lexicon to such an extent as comparable exemplars "pro-choice" or "pro-life", so its precise semantic content may not be immediately clear to a majority of readers, and this paragraph does not elucidate specifically what content aired on MTV to which such organizations object—namely, the attempted denial of homosexual citizens equality under the law (let us not forget that Viacom operates Logo through MTV). The phrase "pro-family" should either be qualified or replaced with a more accurate adjectival. SumeragiNoOnmyouji 04:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
One might consider using the term "socially conservative" to refer to groups like FOF and AFA that support regulation or self-regulation by broadcasters to minimize content that condones gay relationships, premarital sex, etc. Terms like "pro-family" might make sense if they are used in contexts where a group like FOF or AFA is describing itself, much like an anti-abortion group might describe itself as "pro-life", but like with the above criticism of the the term "pro-family" as possibly NPOV, a significant number of abortion rights activists and non-activists might question how appropriate or consistent their "pro-life" policies actually are, and so question the accuracy of the term "pro-life". There's also a term "traditional family" which may be more acceptable to socially conservative critiques, and at least as a historical term it's arguably NPOV. southern students for choice - abilene ( talk) 12:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
I came here looking for criticism on how MTV was recieved in the late 90s for ditching music & making reality shows a lingering trend, but all of it seems to have vanished. I don't see much if anything on international MTVs either. I know there's one in South Korea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.77.255 ( talk) 15:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
From what little I've seen of these two shows, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say "Fear Factor" is an imitator of "Fear". Besides being reality shows with "Fear" in the title, the two shows have distinctly different styles... in "Fear" the people are immersed into a situation with helmet-mounted cameras, whereas Fear Factor is a series of disconnected "games" shot conventionally. BinaryTed 16:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
The section on political influence makes it look like they only cared about the 2004 US presidential election. There should be some note reguarding previous elections, especially the 1992 presidential election, since the youth vote was heavily attributed to Clinton's win. ErikNY 15:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
To say that MTV "abandoned" music is a little bit extreme. No one would argue the shift in focus of MTV's programming, but there are shows dedicated to music videos, and music videos regularly play late at night.
No it's not, it's the truth. And how are artists (Yes the crappy ones they play on MTV) going to get recognized when they play late at night and maybe an hour during the day? -Saint Jimmy
While the article acknowledges that the network is no longer as popular as it once was, and also that it is frequently criticized for rarely playing music. What I don't get from the article is a clear explanation for why the network veered more and more away from videos towards non-music related shows that made it popular, and seems to be (from the criticism) what people want the network to be.
was it really? Realferrari 08:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
MTV has a parent corporation called MTV Networks, which owns comedy central. South Park is thus property of MTV Networks, but it isn't created by MTV.
Guidocalvano
01:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I heard from a guy I know who lived in Toronto for a time that MTV wanted to take over Much Music. I can't find a citation, but CHUM (Much Music owners) didn't want to become an MTV station. If anyone can find this information, then it would be good to put in the article. Mr. C.C. 07:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
MTV Networks bought up all music video stations on the public cable in the Netherlands.
Guidocalvano
01:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I remember MTV used to air a cartoon in which cute fuzzy animals ended up either mutilating themselves or killing each other. Anyone knows the name of this cartoon? -- TLW 13:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Happy Tree Friends, but I dont remember MTV showing it...
MTV isn't as nearly as good as BET. Whoever made that statement. -- So Fresh and So Clean_Wish U Was Me 22:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Removed the Panic at the Disco line under censorship. The word "god" is censored not becuase of it's religeous connotations, but rather the fact the "goddamn" (as in "goddamn door") is considered "inappropriate" (for taking the lord's name in vein) by Standards, but "damn" is acceptible to them.
All I have to say is the letter "M" is supposed to stand for MUSIC, man!!!
Yep. MTV is shit and worse, it brainwashes young people. Sad.
Thank you! MTV is shit, it started off pretty well but now with all this hip-hop/rap/r&b shit, it just sucks. Everything on MTV sucks, and yet it still manages to be one of the highest rated networks on TV. Disgusting how so many people can like this...--
FloydZeppelin74
20:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
The most important part of MTV's critique are the videos and the clothing of the artist there. their it may influence the changes in lifestyle of the youth. Also maybe expand into the social and educational influence that MTV imposes among the youth of America.
I read in this article that the president of MTV is Christina Norman, but this article says it's Tom Freston. I'd change it, but I want to check here to make sure I'm not missing some organizational subtlety. -- Allen 06:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I love how someone created a redirect for Empty-V to this page! I found it funny and relavent. Darwin's Bulldog 04:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Among the things to do:
-- Samvscat 08:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, I did just about all of those things... if anyone has a problem with it, let me know. -- Samvscat 13:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This list was in the article; I removed it because I don't think it's relevant enough to be in the article, and I put all the other lists into their own articles. However, I think someone would nominate this for deletion if I made an article for it. So, here it is... Top videos on music.mtv.com per year, 8/1/2006
-- Samvscat 05:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Can someone clarify the following paragraph please? Where does the disparity between the "official" and "actual" figure come from? The immediate impact statement doesn't make any sense to me, is it trying to state that 6 people would be gathered around the TV for every "subscriber"? I'm afraid that I don't know enough about the channel history to correct this paragraph. Camw 05:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't Yo, MTV Raps at least be listed in the section MTV comes of age - Format evolution? -- Kyebaush 15:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
This page seems to have a lot of vandalism which I can't clean-up, as a new user. Would someone else mind doing it? 24.1.49.178 21:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Thats all folks
From Nov. 25, 2006 to July 15, 2007 this page was "semi-protected" due to vandalism. On July 17, a few days after semi-protection was lifted, there were two instances of IP vandalism [2] [3], which might signal that this page might need semi-protection again. -- Andrewlp1991 19:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:Mtvmid90s.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
When they first started they wouldn't air videos featureing african american performers. They didn't play any tell record companies threaten a boycott. Seems like a pretty important part of their history. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.27.168.204 ( talk • contribs) 22:44, 12 June 2007.
Today i noticed in the history that someone removed the petition against MTV regarding Janet Jackson's limited airplay. That petition can be found www [dot] petitiononline [dot] com [forward slash] JanMTV06 [forward slash] petition [dot] html. The reason for removal was "Petitiononline links are no good. If the petitions make the news, cite a news source for it. If not, it's not notable. There's never a reason to link to a petition)". However, since the petition has 5,000 sigs, I say it's notable, and does every petition or anything online have to have made the news in order for it to be worthy on Wikipedia? BTW I was the one who added it originally when I was adding sources for the "Controversy" section. Andrewlp1991 03:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't see anything on the talk page justifying the page's protected status. Should this be unprotected? 71.238.246.189 18:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Why is this not mentioned anywhere? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.179.223.76 ( talk • contribs) 13:16, 22 July 2007.
MTV debuted in 1981 and can there for not be the culprit John jarrell 17:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Radiohead is in my opinion quite alive, so are Smashing Pumpkins and Rage Against the Machine (ok maybe the last one fell apart but still). If you want to hear good rock ask your friends.
But on another note. It is amazing how they are quite fond of airing corrupt "punk" bands. The rock is corrupt only about half of the times and is in this respect quite impressive. It is unsetteling though that they apparently manage to get commercials income out of these non corrupt rock bands (or manage to achieve some tactical goal some future commercial money depends on) Guidocalvano 01:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I have added some details about his 1990`s videos its quite possible to say he was still the biggest star in the planet up until the mid 90`s and had some record breaking videos which can be mentioned, his impact on MTV was a lot longer than the thriller album. Realist2 13:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Does the new style song credits look anything like the European counterparts? Cos I don't understand by "larger full-screen font". If anyone has a screenshot, I'd be pleased to see it. 77.97.245.64 08:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)DanZieBoy
There's something wrong with the third paragraph of Previous concepts:
"MTV's programming format was created to control the minds of teenage America.[2] Pittman had test driven the music format by producing and hosting a 15 minute show, Album Tracks, on WNBC, New York, in the late 1970s. Pittman's boss, WASEC COO John Lack, had shepherded a TV series called PopClips, created by former Monkee-turned solo artist Michael Nesmith, the latter of whom by the late 1970s was turning his attention to the music video format.[3]"
Yeah, that first sentence sounds a little dubious too, but who's Pittman? There's no mention of a Pittman anywhere else in the article! 88.114.147.214 23:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Do you think we should feature who is the president of MTV? Van Toffler is the current president of the MTV empire right now. I think he should be mentioned in the info box. Nocarsgo ( talk) 01:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I love MTV! (Hey does anybody want to cite this for me? I dont know how, if you would do it, that would be awsome!! Thank you!!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.159.219 ( talk) 19:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for signing it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.159.219 ( talk) 19:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The MTV.COM web site. This must be some of the earliest commercial web sites EVER! No I'm not on crack. I watched mtv.com on a NCSA Mosaic browser back in late 1994 (or early 1995)! MTV was very early on the web; hence we should give an overview about the first web site launch of MTV. Would interest a lot of people, I suppose. [edit] Found some more stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curry#The_Web_and_MTV.com and http://groups.google.com/group/alt.folklore.urban/browse_thread/thread/51d41f9e26a69bf5/b50358df1931f955?hl=en&q=insubject%3Amtv.com&lnk=ol& -andy 85.179.223.255 ( talk) 18:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
A merge shouldn't happen at all. Now that we have criticism and censorship articles, the section is finally balanced. I'm removing the merge tag. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 10:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The above says it all. This article is a bit to extenstive to hold some peoples interest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paycheckgurl ( talk • contribs) 02:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted in the MTV wikipedia page that there is a formal petition to have MTV Networks change the name of their most carried channels: MTV (abbr.-Music Television) and VH1 (abbr.-Video Hits 1) to something more fitting to their programming. Neither channel plays music videos except for maybe less than 5% of their time, and there are channels that do have the MTV and VH1 name that actually do play music videos and video performances: what is now MTV Hits and VH1 Classic. The formal petition was cited here, but because the main website that it's being hosted on is on wikipedia's blacklist page, until formal notice you'll have to find it via a search engine. Surelock22 ( talk) 14:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I have discovered a mistake under the title, "Original VJs and Format". Someone, in their infinite wisdom, has locked this article and made it uneditable.
The mistake is the band name "Rolling Stones." The name of the band is "The Rolling Stones" and this section should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.43.126 ( talk) 23:15, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
MTV should become more minimalistic like the cool Rage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.130.136.199 ( talk) 23:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
MTV Games redirects here, but is not mentioned in article. Fail. Mathiastck ( talk) 21:33, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
98.208.203.223 added this content to the article. It's an interesting story, but it's totally unsourced and not written in wiki style at all. I don't know what else to do with it so I'm putting it here. Anyone want to try and edit it? -- Samvscat ( talk) 03:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Maybe they're covered in a subarticle?, the early MTV art breaks, short avante garde videos that were neither music videos nor station IDs. Would be nice to have a mention of them at least, though it's a fairly long article presently. Will look for sources. Шизомби ( talk) 23:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
At the time of writing (June 2009) there are two sections in the article both labelled "Recent Programming" neither of which is actually recent, one referring to 2007 and the other 2008. The idea of recent is entirely subjective. What was recent to the writer may not be recent to the reader, and as time passes it will inevitably no longer be recent. Better to phrase it differently or to use a specific time frame such as "MTV since 2007" and avoid writing the requires lots of maintenance. -- Horkana ( talk) 18:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
it is important to note that MTV was originally created for the sole purpose of watching music videos. Today, however, it has evolved into a comedy/ reality TV headquarters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.119.140.242 ( talk) 22:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Reading through the article, it seems like there is a lot of praise for MTV without even mentioning a single bit of the large deal of criticism the channel has against it. Also, there are some phrases have been tweaked to make MTV seem like a 'moral champion' when in fact they are nothing more than shutting out opposing views. I changed "anti-religious bigotry" to "anti-religious themes", trying to find a neutral phrase for the censorship. Ftc08 ( talk) 17:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Although the introduction makes a passing reference to the impact of MTV on the music industry, the article itself doesn't really get into the subject. It needs a section devoted to the topic, which could include the remarkable effect that MTV had on the sales of an industry that was then in the doldrums, how MTV (arguably) gave rise to such genres as hair metal, and the like. It should be researched and written by somebody more knowledgeable than me. -- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 11:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
The moral influence section deals with controversies that MTV has either been involved in or created. Since a controversy section is not foreign to a plethora of Wikipedia pages, and a controversy section can be created/modified in a neutral manner, this particular section should be re-titled " Controversy " Moreover, there is no other controversial show currently on MTV as infamous as Jersey Shore. The amount of criticism the show has received from national Italian American groups and news in conjunction with the amount of press releases the network has generated in defense of the show is well documented via print ads and news videos. Both of these aspects should be included in a Jersey Shore subtopic under a topic heading of "Controversy" to relay a neutral, yet fact specific account of this current occurrence with MTV. If there is no objection to this in the next day or so, I will go forward with incorporating this idea into the article. -- Accountable1 ( talk) 20:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
MTV:Lanched 2000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.82.164.170 ( talk) 03:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change 10 on Top beginning date from August 2010 to May 2010, because that is the month Lenay started 10 on Top. Source: I am her dad.
Olsent1 ( talk) 19:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
hi. can anybody use below page on this article. it about michael jackson.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/story/2011-11-24/mtv-oral-history-book/50896190/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahroozporia ( talk • contribs) 06:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article, File:MTV-FEAR PILOT.GIF, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 09:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
when were blacks ever banned from MTV? if there was never a ban, then how could there have been a barrier? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 04:31, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Uh, dude, there was never a policy that they would not play videos with blacks in them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 00:07, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
There was never a policy explicitly stating so, but that doesn't mean that MTV execs didn't turn a blind eye to black artists pre-Michael Jackson. Just so you know, you can discriminate without being blatantly obvious about it. 24.189.87.160 ( talk) 04:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
your assertion proves nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 16:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
it is nonsense that MTV, an organization created to make money, would turn a "blind eye" to music that could have made them more money. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk • contribs)
From the article:
"The former president of CBS Records, Walter Yetnikoff, remembered with scorn that MTV would not play "Billie Jean" or "Beat It" because it billed itself as a rock station.
Looking back on that era, a 1991 Los Angeles Times article quoted MTV founder and then-CEO Robert Pittman as saying the channel's format didn't lend itself to other musical styles, including R&B and country. And Pittman accused his critics of attempting to impose their musical pluralism on the channel's die-hard rock fans.
But Yetnikoff said he threatened to pull videos of his other artists unless MTV played Jackson's videos. Watch Yetnikoff talk about getting Jackson's videos played »
Soon Jackson's videos were heavily in rotation on MTV. Showcasing a black artist paved the way for the popular show, "Yo! MTV Raps," and other black artists, Neal said.
In turn, Jackson became one of the first African-Americans to be a global icon.
He also influenced a new generation of black musicians, including Usher, Ne-Yo and Kanye West, according to Joycelyn Wilson, a professor of African-American studies at Morehouse College, who specializes in popular culture and hip-hop studies."
I've got veritable proof to back up my "assertion". Try countering that. 24.189.87.160 ( talk) 21:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
if it billed itself as a rock station then maybe that is why they wouldn't play good old pedophile Mike's records? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.255.231 ( talk) 23:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
"It was really Prince who opened the door for Michael and not the other way around".
Sorry, but who's trying to rewrite history now? Not even die-hard Prince fans spew such nonsense. 24.189.87.160 ( talk) 08:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Was it The Young Ones like i'm often told, or was this just the UK version?-- 92.237.91.201 ( talk) 21:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
These list old websites of MTV shows WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I was doing some research around MTV and found a discrepancy.
- This entry says MTV debuted on August 1, 1980 - However, the "video killed the radio star" entry (and the source cited within this article) says it debuted on August 1, 1981
Which is correct?
Hoppy44 ( talk) 02:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC) Hoppy44, 11-30-2012 (be kind and apologies for wrong format or etiquette, first post ever on Wikipedia)
Under Launch/Previous Concepts... the text begins: "Pittman's boss, WASEC Executive Vice President John Lac...".
Who the heck is Pittman??? There is nothing that identifies this man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.248.6 ( talk) 04:09, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I wondered the same. He's identified later as the "programming chief, Robert W. Pittman" — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
176.25.6.46 (
talk)
22:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I noticed there is no mention of Disney's Fantasia being an influence or previous concept similar to the mtv concept. Fantasia predates the ones mentioned in this section as of this date. 71.3.104.21 ( talk) 06:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Previously, the article stated that MTV was launched in 1980, even though the source says 81, and that was in fact the actual year. Just changed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTCBlues ( talk • contribs) 16:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
MTV. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
This article reads like a freakin advert for mtv.. Nothing about the founder or his cia connection. Nothing about the occult symbolism... Nothing about nothing.. wikipeda stinks to high heaven, no wonder why you have to rattle you can for money every year...
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.89.152.78 ( talk) 22:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Warner Bros did. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
79.21.115.55 (
talk)
11:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
There should be a section that goes in depth about how MTV has shifted most of its music video and music show programming to secondary channels called MTV Hits and MTV Live (formerly Palladia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctrg298 ( talk • contribs) 03:54, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
I added MTV's 1985 safe-sex campaign which still exists today as Its Your Sex Life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susannabananna ( talk • contribs) 14:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The MTV Article has biased wording stated in it. I have removed the biased wording because MTV is relevant in their target audience. Just because ratings are falling does not mean they are not relevant anymore. MTV has a large following presence on social media and receive great interactions on there from viewers. Nielson ratings also fails to capture the amount of viewers for new episodes of shows through services like Hulu, Netflix and also from the MTV App. I believe the article is just fine with describing the current ratings fall that MTV is having as it is restructuring itself with different programming and destinations for people to watch content live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctrg298 ( talk • contribs) 03:30, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I noticed that sometime in December 2016, music feed was no longer airing on MTV. Upon checking my program guide then later verifying it with the TV schedule on mtv.com. Music feed does not air for the next two weeks, therefore based on this it is safe to say that MTV no longer shows music videos. So stop reverting my edits.
www.mtv.com/tv-schedule — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:C701:AB71:592F:E227:8502:E82E ( talk) 19:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
The addition of this show would be good to have here. Or does it not count because it was syndicated and not network like "Friday Night Videos" [1] on NBC? [2] 67.81.235.93 ( talk) 18:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_14_110/ai_n16807343/pg_1?tag=artBody%3Bcol1When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:47, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://mtvpress.com/press/release/its_an_fn_mtv_summer/{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://blog.tylerc.com/post/22264141144/more-adds-loose-ends-and-lament{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.realitytvmagazine.com/blog/2007/12/20/tila-tequila-goes-for-the-guy/{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mtvca/tvshows/show.jhtml?id=22413When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:34, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://living.scotsman.com/music.cfm?id=854582006{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.tvacres.com/censorship_beavis.htmWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on MTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:54, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
The article head fails to convey that MTV had a huge influence in the early 1990s for all of pop and rock music, and that not one current day 12 year old has ever heard about it. It was everything then, nothing now. I would like a contrasting description towards that direction. Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.138.189.193 ( talk) 23:31, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Last time I saw MTV change their logo, it was back in 2009. Or was it 2008? I don't think MTV's new logo debuted in 2010, it must've debuted in 2008 or 2009.-- 67.226.16.44 ( talk) 16:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Some of the wording in this section seems off, I'm not really sure what it's saying. Not sure if it's vandalism that's not been cleared up but thought I'd note it here. Alduin2000 ( talk) 00:25, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
MTV orchestrated the switch from Pop-metal to Alternative, they didn't follow it. The article gives the impression that MTV was merely responding to a change in popular taste rather than facilitating it. Mention should be made of MTV's power to dictate trends via video airplay policies, examples of such (including the intentional creation of one-hit wonders by refusing to air follow-up videos) and when they had reached a level of influence enabling them to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:87F:FE77:BD59:F18:EE5A:4BBC ( talk) 07:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Removed a lot of extra/unsourced info and added in sources where needed. Removed the refimprove tag for this section! Balle010 ( talk) 16:59, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Streamlined sections pertaining to MTV's history. Since the Nickelodeon page spun off its History section into another article called History of Nickelodeon, I suggest someone do the same with MTV as the article has become cluttered. MarcoPolo250 ( talk) 19:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Cory Doctorow wrote in 2001 that MTV ditched music videos due to the difficulty of generating Nielsen ratings for them. I'm having trouble verifying this elsewhere, though it's reasonable to think MTV wouldn't want to discuss this publicly. Maybe it was just an urban legend circulating almost 20 years ago, but since it wasn't just anyone making the claim, I thought I'd leave a note here in case someone wants to pick up the trail. -- BDD ( talk) 18:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
If people think Nickelodeon was first founded in 1977 as "Pinwheel", then MTV was first founded in 1977 as "Sight on Sound". — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChowderRulez ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
That is mentioned in the article. Beamsprout ( talk) 18:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Please stop changing the short description to say "pay TV". As noted by Yoshiman6464 in revision 1009761041, MTV is a cable network. pay television is a premium channel that requires a subscription, like HBO and Showtime. MTV does not fall under that category. If you have evidence that says otherwise I'm happy to look at it, but I'm currently certain that calling MTV "pay TV" is factually incorrect. Jkmartindale ( talk) 18:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
I reverted a section about censorship that was added by an IP. It was copied from Censorship on MTV without attribution and no sources were provided. No problem if someone cleans it up and sources it before re-adding. — Alexis Jazz ( talk or ping me) 21:47, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
As the history of the network has taken up half of the article, I suggest spinning off it and other sections into their own pages and keep the main article focused on the core network itself. Thecleanerand ( talk) 00:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
This article claims "During MTV's first few years, very few black artists were featured. The select few in MTV's rotation were ..." then proceeds to list off FOURTEEN different black artists that received regular airplay. Having been an actual MTV viewer during those days, I know there was far more than that. This claim is a crock of shit. 2604:2D80:4080:9500:502E:C616:28B2:66E1 ( talk) 23:28, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello editors, my name is Adriane and I work for MTV Entertainment Group. I'm hoping we can update this article so that it's more accurate and complete, but I know I can't make any of those edits directly and I want to make sure I follow all the conflict of interest rules. So to that end, I was hoping someone might be able to help me with updating the listed CEO in the infobox? MTV's President and CEO is Chris McCarthy. That's listed in this source.
I've also got some additional sourcing related to Mr. McCarthy heading the network, including this story from Adweek and this one from Variety. Maybe we could turn that into a sentence in the article introduction, something like:
References
Please let me know what you think and if we can make that update. Thanks in advance for your help! ABrownMTVE ( talk) 00:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Why no mention of Jackass in the entire article? MTV still owns this popular franchise. And there should be a description of the controversy with Senator Joe Lieberman over MTV's original Jackass series in 2001, in the Controversies section. 174.214.16.149 ( talk) 17:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Why does this article introduce MTV as a music video channel? MTV describes itself (more accurately) as reality shows and celebrity news. Worldbook1967 ( talk) 06:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)