Breast glimpse fine

[talksense101]

Breast glimpse costly
$550,000 fine for Janet Jackson flash

REUTERS NEWS AGENCY

WASHINGTON—A flash of pop singer Janet Jackson's bare breast during the Super Bowl football game will cost broadcaster CBS a record $550,000 (U.S.) for violating indecency rules.

The Federal Communications Commission voted to impose fines of $27,500 on each of the 20 stations owned by the television network, a unit of media conglomerate Viacom Inc., for airing the infamous "wardrobe malfunction."

"The U.S. Constitution is generous in its protection of free expression, but it is not a licence to thrill," said FCC chairman Michael Powell. "The context of the halftime show leads us to conclude that the breast-baring finale was intended."

FCC = Despicable hypocrites.

What about the several hundred television stations like Fashion TV, E!? What about magazines on stands?

It is not like the nation doesn't get its daily dose of sex around the clock. European nations are more mature in dealing with boobs on the boob tube.

Edit: tried to explain it better... don't think it worked...

[Scott]

What about those other stations? :no: Look, if you don't know what you are taking about maybe you shouldn't start new threads. You are part of the uninformed electorate that will be voting my birthday.:no:

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Yes, we have breast on billboards all over southern Europe and there's no fornication on the streets.

Apart from in Portugal.

[New]

Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Yes, we have breast on billboards all over southern Europe and there's no fornication on the streets.

Apart from in Portugal.

Crazy europeans...!

[bunge]

Vagina.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Yes, we have breast on billboards all over southern Europe and there's no fornication on the streets.

Apart from in Portugal.


:lol: Good one.

While I think the stunt was pretty tasteless and support a fine (because it was intentional, no matter what they say), I have to say I also see your point. I don't think I'd be wrong, though, in saying that nudity seems to be presented in a less vulgar way in Europe and other nations in general. Am I wrong there?

My problem with the jackson thing is that millions of families were watching, never in a miilion years expecting to see what they did. It's not the nudity really, it's the sexual message that was sent because of how it was done. Kids today are becoming oversexed, and things like this contribute. It's even been shown that because of the amount of "oversexification" of our culture that girls are starting physically develop earlier.

Sex isn't bad and either is nudity. It's just that I don't think a young child needs to see someone ripping off a bra to expose a nipple while people basically "dry fuck" in the show at the same time. Somehow I think there's a line there, one which kids should not cross at say, 8 years old.

[bunge]

Originally posted by SDW2001
My problem with the jackson thing is that millions of families were watching, never in a miilion years expecting to see what they did.

People should understand that television, like the internet, is not puritanical. Especially now with TiVO and other similiar technologies, families should be responsible for making sure the television their children watch is as safe as they want it to be.

[Jeremiah Rich]

Originally posted by bunge
People should understand that television, like the internet, is not puritanical. Especially now with TiVO and other similiar technologies, families should be responsible for making sure the television their children watch is as safe as they want it to be.

Of course. However, the Super Bowl is not something you would ever expect to have THAT. And it is not something you would want to "watch later". I would doubt anyone expected it to happen. Some families DO turn of the halftime show, I think a thing that is becoming rapidly something that is responsible to do, especially with little children, but I doubt anyone would expect to see nudity on it. I sure did not. I think the strongest arguement for it all is the fact of who the audience was. If this had been on a tv show that is themed around sex and violence, I think I would have a bit less of an arguement...

[tonton]

Originally posted by Jeremiah Rich
Of course. However, the Super Bowl is not something you would ever expect to have THAT. And it is not something you would want to "watch later". I would doubt anyone expected it to happen. Some families DO turn of the halftime show, I think a thing that is becoming rapidly something that is responsible to do, especially with little children, but I doubt anyone would expect to see nudity on it. I sure did not. I think the strongest arguement for it all is the fact of who the audience was. If this had been on a tv show that is themed around sex and violence, I think I would have a bit less of an arguement...

LOL! The superbowl. Not "themed around violence"? Right. The entire sport is themed around violence. And many a woman wathces because of sex. Don't kid yourself.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by tonton
LOL! The superbowl. Not "themed around violence"? Right. The entire sport is themed around violence. And many a woman wathces because of sex. Don't kid yourself.

Somehow I think there is more to the game than violence and sex.

The whole point is what was said above...most people would never expect to see that in sucha program. I mean, would you have a problem if something like that happened during the olympics or a family sitcom?

I've pretty much seen it all sex and violence wise, and I'm telling you I was in literally in shock at that. I'm not kidding, my jaw hit the floor and stayed there.

[Northgate]

:no: :rolleyes: :mad:

[Aquatic]

Either Republicans are gay or they are playa haters. Why else why they be so fucking tightass? Isn't it still illegal in some Red state to masturbate or something? Republicans suck cock.

[Splinemodel]

It's not Republicans, but the FCC. Of course, I wouldn't mind if both groups faded away. The FCC's involvement in media should only be from a technical perspecitve. That is, allocating bandwidth.

[burningwheel]

Originally posted by talksense101
FCC = Despicable hypocrites.

What about the several hundred television stations like Fashion TV, E!? What about magazines on stands?

It is not like the nation doesn't get its daily dose of sex around the clock. European nations are more mature in dealing with boobs on the boob tube.

Edit: tried to explain it better... don't think it worked...
the US is a great country and i wouldn't want to live anywhere else but it can be totally GEE :) about sex, swearing on TV, and many other things :no:

[shetline]

For some reason, I can't help but read the title of this thread as "Breast glimpse? Fine!"

[curiousuburb]

Originally posted by shetline
For some reason, I can't help but read the title of this thread as "Breast glimpse? Fine!"

Totally!

And then I was going to add... but not that fine. Seen better. :devil:

[shetline]

Originally posted by curiousuburb
Totally!

And then I was going to add... but not that fine. Seen better. :devil:
Well, I was referring to the general concept, not the Janet Jackson case in particular. :D

[curiousuburb]

Originally posted by shetline
Well, I was referring to the general concept, not the Janet Jackson case in particular. :D

stone = birds x 2 :D