IT could only happen in America... The fallout from that now infamous Superbowl performance is continuing to send shock-waves across the US.

For anyone who has been asleep for the last week, Janet Jackson flashed her breast on live television during her half-time Superbowl performance with man of the moment Justin Timberlake.

As he pulled off part of her costume, he thought he would be revealing her red bra but instead he got an eyeful when he exposed her boob and a rather unattractive nipple stud.

The fact that you could hardly see anything because of the size of her cleavage jewellery did not matter to the American viewing public.

Hundreds of people complained that their family viewing was ruined by the split second sight of Janet's asset.

What about the more important questions - what was a has-been like Janet doing on the same stage as Justin and why has her family's love of plastic surgery not extended to her oddly shaped boobs?

Since the incident both stars have used every TV and radio opportunity to apologise for the flash and there are even rumours of a congressional investigation into the incident!

Despite America having the world's largest pornography industry (does one bare breast constitute porn?) the moral crusade is now on a roll.

In 'the current climate' MTV have decided not to show the video for Britney Spear's new song, Toxic, until after the watershed.

In the vid, young Miss Spears is an air hostess snogging a bloke in a plane toilets - is that really more worrying than her first, and most famous, video which saw her pumping and grinding while dressed as a schoolgirl?

Or what about kiddies' favourites Atomic Kitten who repeatedly straddled their male dancers in stage performances of their last single Ladies Night?

It's a fact that the current fashion is for female singers to shake their bums while wearing short skirts and bra tops while male artists are only seen as cool if they have a bevy of scantily-clad ladies dancing around them - and the image sells to people of all ages.

So does the action over Britney's video mean all these other performers are going to be told to clean up their acts or miss out on prime time coverage? What will MTV fill it's 24 hour schedule with? Or am I being too cynical in thinking Britney is being offered as a quick sacrificial lamb to those who hated punk and rave and are now turning their attention to pop?

Getting back to Ms Jackson - I wonder how many young eyes actually saw Janet's misdemeanour. I am sure most were scoffing half time chips and coke rather than watching the appearance of some middle-aged woman they hadn't heard of. And those that were watching the stage or 50ft screens probably blinked and missed the moment and are most likely wondering what all the fuss was about.

It's about time the adults of America grew up and realised that a flash of flesh is not going to bring an end to the moral fibre of a nation.

If the protesters really want to clean up their country they should channel their energies into fighting the growing international child porn industry and leave entertainers to their age old game of courting controversy.

Sending out the message that there is something abhorrent about the human body will only lead to a generation of very mixed up children - what was wrong with parents explaining Janet's 'accident' to their kids and all having a good laugh at her expense?

It is not up to TV companies to take on the role of Mum and Dad and show a sanitised view of a world which is far from perfect - especially when we are talking about the quickest look at the smallest amount of skin.

If the campaigners had left the Superbowl alone the whole sorry episode would have been forgotten by now instead it is still being repeated on television channels throughout the world giving another sad member of the Jackson clan a chance to hang onto the headlines and more importantly subjecting us all to another look at that terrible line in nipple jewellery!