The demise of the Jacksons?

While driving home from work yesterday, I heard that Janet Jackson's new album, Damita Jo debuted on the charts at number 2, having sold 381,000 albums (the top spot, incidentally, is held by Usher's Confessions). The disc jockey described this as further evidence that the Jackson family is no longer important. Janet's last album, he pointed out, debuted at number 1 and sold more copies in its first week than Damita Jo. The DJ went on to point to Janet's "breast flop" at the Super Bowl to account for her chart slippage.

And we all know about Michael's problems.*

I'm inclined to agree that the Jackson musical well seems to have run dry. But I hardly see how the Super Bowl incident hurt Janet's sales. People have been talking about how her music has grown increasingly stale for years. Reviews of her last two albums have hardly been sparkling. Janet hasn't broken new musical ground in over a decade. There will always been the diehard fans, of course, who will guarantee a certain sales level. But how many general listeners are that interested in hearing another Janet Jackson album about sex? My sense is not that many.

Would we be hearing about Damita Jo if not for the Super Bowl incident? Probably not. I just fail to see how the breast baring could have possibly hurt Janet's sales figures. The people who were deathly offended by it weren't going to be buying it anyway. But if you're interested in buzz, it's hard to get much more buzzworthy than Janet Jackson. If any, the Super Bowl increased sales of Damita Jo.

That said, unless Janet Jackson becomes innovative again (as she was on Rhythm Nation: 1814), it's pretty safe to assume that she's done as a genuinely musical force. And if her cultural currency is based on brief nudity on national television, she's likely on the way out of the mainstream anyway.

*I listened to Thriller a couple days ago. Damn if that isn't a fantastic album.