Bushies Now Fighting Janet Jackson/CBS Indecency Case Up To Supreme Court

19 Comments »

1. Waste of money, time and energy.

   Comment by Colby — November 21, 2008 @ 11:01 am

2. The Super Bowl is a family event. It is not only viewed by 20-something male football fans. Kids of both sexes, as well as those who watch for the new corporate commercials, are avid viewers. CBS and MTV should be fined up the wazzoo - if not for their idiocy, then as a cautionary tale for future broadcasts.

   Comment by savvydude — November 21, 2008 @ 11:28 am

3. Talk about not being able to pick their battles.

   It was a boob, it was an accident, it was an accidental boob.

   Give it up.

   Comment by Furious D — November 21, 2008 @ 11:32 am

4. This is an absurd waste of time.

   They should being suing CBS for pushing Dan Rather to leave his position at the network.

   Evan
   http://www.beyondrace.com

   Comment by Evan — November 21, 2008 @ 12:13 pm

5. Social conservatism used to mean resisting change, or insisting that change occur slowly. Nowadays it refers to the reactionary crusade against anything deemed “liberal”, regardless of logical consistency with the rest of its beliefs.

   I have no time for people who refuse to allow consenting adults to marry, but throw a hissy fit when they hear “Happy Holidays” in December. Nor for those who petition towns to put up billboards of aborted fetuses in front of schools, but sue the FCC when their children see a human breast on television.

   God reserves a special place in hell for the self-righteous.

   Comment by liberal scum — November 21, 2008 @ 12:21 pm

6. I don’t see what the problem is with using a 10-second digital delay during live events. TV networks did this in the 1970s and 1980s with analog tape-based delays (using a video tape stretched between two VTRs - one recording and the other playing back). Today’s digital delays result in no picture loss.

   It’s even more incredible that the webs let music awards shows go out without delays with the artists dropping the f-bomb all over the place.

   The fine to CBS should have been for stupidity and should have woke up the other networks to run a delay. I understand there may be some sound-sync problems to work out, but nothing that can’t be worked out.

   With the reversal of the fine, networks can continue to run live events without delay and then say they had nothing to do with it when someone drops their pants or flashes the one-fingered peace sign.

   Comment by Dan Zee — November 21, 2008 @ 12:23 pm

7. Had it been an accident I would say fine.

   But it was a staged event clearly intending to mock FCC regulations.

   Why don’t “GMA-”like morning shows get fined for slips of the tongue from people like Jane Fonda and Diane Keaton?

   They were accidents in theory; not part of the programming staff.

   The CBS/Super Bowl production team knew the rules. Whoever produced the show broke them on purpose and a story was made up after the fact.

   MTV-style they manufactured the controversy.

   They may as well have just put a fine in the budget.

   When people protest they have to pay to get there in order to participate.

   If this was some kind of protest they should have been prepared for the consequences.

   The minute that the Super Bowl turns up on cable do whatever you want.

   I don’t applaud the Bushes for pursuing it; but I do understand the rationale.

   Viacom. MTV. Redstone. They zapped “civil disobedience” of all improvisation. EVERYTHING is now organized within “the system” of media. Marketed. Branded.

   You made a lot of money doing that. You dumbed down a whole generation of students weaned on a self-involving so-considered “You Tube” revolution where it isn’t even necessary to go outside.

   Go green Sumner. Stop being an opportunistic hypocrite. You got the buzz you craved. Pay the fine and shut up.

   It’s only fitting that it would come out of the shareholders’ pocket correct?

   Got an idea. Take it out of mega-talent Julie Chen’s salary.

   You certainly can’t improve the “The Early Show’s” ratings when it’s clearly verboten to mix it up with the talent that hasn’t delivered any ratings for a long time now…and never will…

   Comment by Bozo the Clown — November 21, 2008 @ 1:14 pm

8. every horny 10-year-old has seen much better (worse?) on the internet.

   Comment by ragerover — November 21, 2008 @ 1:35 pm

9. liberal scum: I think you’re confusing self-righteous with concern for our children and the future of our country. Let me guess, you aborted all your kids so you couldn’t care less. Just to clarify, Janet Jackson’s prank wasn’t an accident. It was a deliberate ploy to boost her popularity through increasing her notoriety. A not that well thought out attempt either considering she looked like a fool and since then her career has gone down the toilet. As savvydude correctly points out, the Superbowl is no place for a self-serving stunt like that and it was illegal and kudos to ‘the Bushies’ for making a stand.

   Don’t worry liberal scum, you will have the country you want soon enough.

   Comment by RTNG — November 21, 2008 @ 2:18 pm

10. certainly not surprised that ms. finke sees this admin’s action as an outrage. you see, in her world, anything goes, just change the channel, “it was a mistake”, yea sure,
    you see, it also occured to her that the justice department has been suddenly politicized in the last eight years. where has she been ?
    remember folks, ther can only be one point of view, and any others will be shouted down as racist, intolerant, homophobic, sexist, whatever.
    ms. finke, spread out your titties for all of us to see, it’s a whole new world.

    Comment by JD — November 21, 2008 @ 2:54 pm

11. The federal government has no business regulating the arts, whether televised or not, even if it means full-nude strip shows are free to appear unblurred on NBC in prime time. Which might even be a good thing. If explicit nudity were freely available on broadcast TV, parents who truly wanted to “protect the children” would finally have no choice but to supervise their children’s viewing, and those who want such material banned for other reasons would have to find another excuse.

    Comment by Writer Bob — November 21, 2008 @ 6:30 pm

12. writer bob,

    you’ve posted for a long time on nikki’s site, and you’ve always been within the ballpark of reality, what’s up with your 6:30 post? your post is so moronic, i’m thinking maybe it’s a different “writer bob”…maybe it’s your evil twin “writer boob”.

    Comment by btl teamster — November 21, 2008 @ 8:01 pm

13. This is a total waste of time. The networks should actually be sued for the appalling job they did during the recent election cycle. In my opinon, their ahem, ‘journalists’ violated the public trust. That’s what I call indecent.

    Comment by AaronSch — November 21, 2008 @ 10:07 pm

14. BTL Teamster, I’m not advocating full frontal nudity in network prime time, I said “the federal government has no business regulating the arts.” Running morally unpopular programming presents no more valid justification for terminating one’s license than airing politically unpopular programming. The choice of what to broadcast rightfully belongs to the broadcaster.

    The FCC should limit its activities to its sole legitimate purpose of managing the allocation of spectrum.

    Comment by Writer Bob — November 21, 2008 @ 11:03 pm

15. Based on the previous comments, it’s sadly obvious that some wing-nut site has linked to DHD!

    So let’s get a few things clear here:

    1. CBS had no prior knowledge of it happening. That’s clear from viewing it as almost no one knew about it until after the fact. CBS cut away from her exposed nipple in well under a second.

    2. This was Jackson’s doing & only her doing!
    The bra top had to be rigged with a fabric adhesive, Velcro or some sort of basting stitch designed to tear away. The only question unanswered is whether Justin Timberlake knew about it in advance. He’s never answered that question & Jackson has been totally evasive as well, even when Letterman questioned her about it & it was obvious that she thought a deal was in place for him not to ask any embarrassing questions.
    She didn’t know Dave at all, he never goes along with any deals supposedly made by his staff, he asks what’s needed to be asked.

    3. The FCC’s obsession with her saggy tit is beyond idiotic & has exposed the members of the FCC as boobs.
    We can only hope that the long held belief that the Supreme Court reads the election returns is true & they will throw out this moronic waste of time & money.
    Of course Obama could end it by saying that he will pardon CBS & he won’t let the FCC fine anyone for obscenity unless the station is first convicted of obscenity in a federal court.

    4. Why aren’t all the right-wing cultural whackjobs demanding that the Grand Tetons be renamed?
    From Wikipedia: “The most common explanation is that “Grand Teton” means “large teat” in French”

    As a 14 year old boy upon first seeing them as we drove through Grand Teton National Park that was also my first thought. As was my father’s & my mom’s too.

    This is going to be one of the last battles of the culture wars.
    The wing-nuts have lost, you’re now the dead-enders fighting a losing battle. The more you fight, the more you lose.

    Comment by Unindicted Co-Conspirator — November 22, 2008 @ 12:08 am

16. I’m still trying to wrap my head around this whole “nudity is bad for children to see” concept. How did that come about?

    Comment by Ary — November 22, 2008 @ 4:38 am

17. Such a fuss over a fake tit. Besides, the nipple wasn’t even showing so it was little different than what you see at the Oscars when actresses show up with three quarters of their tits hanging out of their gowns.

    Comment by Francine Fishpaw — November 22, 2008 @ 4:13 pm

18. I agree it was a stunt on Janet Jackson’s part, but, as has been pointed out, kids see much worse on TV or the internet than a glimpse of Janet Jackson’s boob with pastie. I’m not a parent, but if I were, I think I’d have been more embarassed by the countless viagra commericals that aired during that superbowl than the Janet Jackson incident. IMHO, total overreaction.

    Comment by shell — November 23, 2008 @ 11:54 am

19. I’d like to thank all those who stopped by to remind us that titties are bad and we should be ashamed of our bodies. Thanks a heap!

    How much tax payer money is the FCC burning through with this nonsense?

    Comment by Rich Drees — November 25, 2008 @ 6:23 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment