WHAT’S THE STORY?
WHETHER wearing a dress made of meat or a latex nun’s habit, she has seldom been accused of playing it safe.
But fans are split over Lady Gaga’s half-time Super Bowl performance, with many claiming she did not go far enough.
Speculation had been rife about what stunts the outspoken performer would pull at the annual sports extravaganza, which is amongst America’s biggest cultural events.
ANY PREVIOUS CONTROVERSIES?
LOADS. Who can forget Janet Jackson’s infamous “wardrobe malfunction”, when fellow singer Justin Timberlake ripped off a panel from the front of her leather outfit to expose a bejewelled breast.
Jackson insists that it was an accident, while rapper MIA was sued for $16.6 million for raising her middle finger to the camera while performing with Madonna.
The Federal Communications Commission received more than 220 complaints about that broadcast and MIA settled out of court with hosts the National Football League (NFL).
Beyonce also raised eyebrows with a set referencing Black Panthers.
That played against a backdrop of increased racial tensions as the Black Lives Matter campaign protested the deaths of black men at the hands of police.
SO WHAT DID GAGA DO?
SHE, umm, sang her greatest hits. Not the most outrageous of sets from a singer who set out to shock as she built her career.
The meat dress was her outfit of choice to the 2010 MTV Video Awards, when she spoke out against the US military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on LGBTI personnel.
The nun’s habit came in her Alejandro video, predictably causing upset with its provocative use of Catholic imagery.
With this record, fans imagined the singer would have something ready for President Donald Trump when the 51st sporting event hit Houston, Texas.
The National Rifle Association had been so concerned that they issued a public plea to Gaga, whose real name is Stefani Gemanotta, not to issue a “declaration of war” between “pop culture people and actual citizens”.
In the end, they had little to worry about.
ANYTHING TO TALK ABOUT AT ALL?
WELL, Hillary Clinton liked it. She tweeted that she was “one of the 100 million Super Bowl fans that just went Gaga for the Lady & her message to all of us”.
That message is thought to be one of inclusivity, diversity and unity – that’s what’s in her lyrics anyway, with songs like Born This Way becoming anthems for the LGBTI community.
Backed by scores of dancers and a serious budget, her Super Bowl show did feature drones, which may or may not have been a comment on the military-industrial complex.
As many as 300 of the illuminated gadgets flew above her, following an official request for clearance from the Federal Aviation Authority.
She also belted out a melody of God Bless America, by immigrant Irving Berlin, and Woody Guthrie’s This Land Is Our Land, which offers criticism of the forces of inequality in the United States, but decided to eschew some of its more pointed passages.
But, all in all, there was little to start any fires, aside from the pyrotechnics used in the show.
REALLY, NOTHING?
THAT depends on who you ask. Alt-right figurehead Alex Jones, the founder of InfoWars, had warned followers not to watch the set due to Gaga’s status as the spawn of Satan.
In a Facebook rant, Jones claimed the entertainer “does rituals” and said her Super Bowl set would “defile America” by having the public “bow down to this”.
The commentator added: “They say she’s going to stand on top of the stadium, ruling over everyone in a big swarm.
"To just condition them to say ‘I am the Goddess of Satan’ ruling over them with the rise of the robots in a ritual of lesser magic.”
OH, OKAY THEN
QUITE. But maybe everyone should have just paid attention when Gaga discussed her plans for the show last year.
She was invited to perform after singing the US national anthem in 2016 and, looking ahead, said she had been researching previous big scoring acts like Michael Jackson and Diana Ross.
She told Radio Disney it would be an all-ages affair, stating: “I want every guy’s girlfriend in his arms, I want every husband and wife kissing, every kid laughing.
“In my mind they’re having this really powerful family experience watching the Super Bowl.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here