On Friday, CBS finally paid the $550,000 indecency fine that the FCC levied against the network and its stations for the Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl. Then, according to this article, they turned right around and sued the government agency over their ruling, claiming the fine for the unexpected incident was unfair.Then why did they pay the fine? According to CBS, they had to pay the fine in order to file the appeal. Some system, huh? You can't sue the government until you pay them first. Anyway, its good to see the networks finally fighting back against the nebulous indecency rules that the FCC uses, especially in light of the recent ten-fold increase of the fine amount. If the incident happened today, CBS would have had to pay the FCC (gulp) $6.5 million. All for a floppy boob. Jeez.















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-31-2006 @ 2:39PM
Brian said...
I was ok with the fine. And, if they lose the appeal, I'm ok with the FCC giving them the new rate of $6.5 million.
What happened was not excusable at all.
Reply
7-31-2006 @ 3:11PM
Bob Sassone said...
But how is it CBS' fault? It was live. CBS didn't plan for Justin Timberlake to whip out Janet Jackson's breast. It was either something Timberlake and Jackson planned, or it was an accident (whichever you believe). Why did the network get the fine?
If networks are going to have to start paying fines for something that happens because of someone else at a live event, that's not going to be good.
Reply
7-31-2006 @ 3:31PM
Tucker said...
Maybe Brian needs to be fined for every single one of his mistakes. I won't even get started on the FCC, but as Joel put it, "all for a floppy boob." Give me a god. damned. break. Millions of people in this country are below the poverty line, we're fighting a war, other people in the world are fighting wars, we're on the brink of a disasterous worldwide energy crisis, people are starving to death worldwide, global warming is destroying the planet... Should I keep going?
All these things are happening and there are still Americans out there crying and averting their eyes because they saw a tit for two seconds during a game where guys beat each other up chasing around a fucking ball. How amazingly prude do you have to be for what happened to be offensive? A nipple is offensive, but a song about 'getting it on' isn't? How many football players turn around to become convicted rapists and murderers? It's ok for athletes and celebrities to do crazy things, but seeing some jugs is bad? Ok, maybe if Justin Timberlake climbed on top of Janet and started shagging her raw right then and there, it might be worth getting upset over. There are how many millions of dollars worth of advertising for beer spent during the SuperBowl? Apparently children are more adversely affected by a brief flash of some melons but completely unaffected by the raw suggestive power of advertising. If I had young kids I just KNOW I'd rather have them guzzling down brews than catching a glimpse of a natural part of human anatomy.
Please, let's all insert insert our heads further in the sand.
Reply
7-31-2006 @ 3:45PM
Travis said...
Geez For 6.5 Million Atlease Get A Better Boob.
Reply
7-31-2006 @ 3:54PM
TVGenius said...
I think the FCC is setting a dangerous precedent here. CBS (obviously) had no idea this was going to happen, and from their reactions, it's pretty obvious that the two morons on stage knew well and good. Neither of them looked even the least bit surprised, or for that matter, concerned about what happened.
If the FCC gets away with this, broadcasters and networks would have to operate under the assumption that ANYTHING, even what is beyond their control, can get them fined. The risk of any O&A (or Stern) fan with an obscene sign, streakers, flashers or a live interviewee that drops the wrong bomb on live TV would seriously hurt the ability of news organizations to be live where news happens. Having worked in small-market TV, if we had ever been fined $27,500 (the pre-10X increase amount) it would have been the last nail in our news department's coffin. The scarier thing, though, is the FCC considering the act of random goons, not the actual broadcasters, to be cause for fines and potentially license revocation.
Reply
7-31-2006 @ 4:27PM
Becks said...
TV Genius, you're absolutely right. Consider this, too:
The government is now requesting sports broadcast tapes from the major networks for isolated instances of profanity.
This action could affect the way rabid sports fans like myself watch Major League Baseball, the NFL, or the World Cup in future years. One of the beauties of live sports broadcasts is the immediacy of the action coupled with the suspense that no one knows how the game will turn out.
Sports events are often blood, guts, in-your-face affairs that involve lots of on-field profanity out of the fans' earshot. If the FCC starts combing sports broadcasts for cuss words, what will they comb for next? NBA pregame player introductions that exceed the noise pollution level? The supposed indecency of Packer fans' cheesehead helmets?
The bottom line is that this, like the Super Bowl indecency fines, will hurt broadcasters' ability to practice their trade. Even Red Sox and Yankees fans can agree that this would bring plenty of sad days for sports fans throughout America.
Reply
7-31-2006 @ 6:14PM
Justin said...
It's just a boob.
50% of the population has two of them. And we only saw one of Janets.
Reply