Tempest in a C-Cup
Cidu Bill on Jul 21st 2008
A federal appeals court today threw out a $550,000 fine levied by the FCC against the CBS television network for showing the momentary exposure of most of Janet Jackson’s breast during the halftime show of the 2004 Super Bowl, saying the agency acted “acted arbitrarily and capriciously” and violated its own policy of only imposing fines when an offense is so “pervasive as to amount to ’shock treatment’ for the audience.” Apparently, an image that can only be seen by somebody with a TIVO does not count.
Incredibly enough, there’s still no mention of any punishment for Justin Timberlake for introducing the phrase “wardrobe malfunction” into the English language.
Nicole reminds me that Billo had a bit to say about this non-issue at the time…
Filed in Bill Bickel, Billo, CBS, FCC, Janet Jackson, Justin Timberlake, Super Bowl, breasts, wardrobe malfunction | 7 responses so far
Powers Jul 22nd 2008 at 07:28 am 1
I don’t know about only being able to see it with a TiVo. We all saw it clearly enough to immediately rewind the live-viewing and look, after all. =)
Powers Jul 22nd 2008 at 07:30 am 2
On another note, cheers to the federal appeals court. Maybe now someone can work on getting Eric Idle’s song on the radio. =)
Cidu Bill Jul 22nd 2008 at 11:51 am 3
Powers, did you really see it clearly, or after Janet and Justin’s reactions did you rewind to see whether you’d actually seen what you thouyght you may have seen?
If she’d been re-covred jus as suddenly as she’d been uncovered, and they’d continued as if anything were amiss, would you even have noticed?
A few years earlier, in Madonna video, she had her own “wradrobe malfunction” which lasted for about as long as Janet’s. The video played countless times before somebody aparently noticed, and then it all became “obvious” using stop-action playback. Of course, as somebody (Rosie O’Donnell?) said to Madonna’s character in “A League of Their Own,” “is there anybody in America who HASN’T seen your bosom?”
But I digress.
Nicole Jul 22nd 2008 at 02:18 pm 4
I think this whole affair was an indication of just how immature some Americans can be. According to the story her breast was visible for 9/16 of a second. Likely as not if you had blinked at the right time you would have missed the whole think. Never mind America’s dichtomic relationship with the female form. Show women wearing bathing suits that cover virtually nothing but the nipple — that is OK — we are fine with that. Show a nipple for slightly more than half a second and “It’s the end of the world as we know it”
Not to mention that showing a man’s nipple is totally acceptable.
This whole thing was just crazy wing nut politics
PS — which Eric Idle song ?????
Arthur Jul 22nd 2008 at 05:37 pm 5
“which Eric Idle song?”
Google for:
“eric idle” “fcc song”
I prefer the version that could be played on radio. I think it shows a bit more humor.
Powers Jul 23rd 2008 at 08:19 am 6
We saw it clearly enough to know what had happened. Any incredulity was just because it was unexpected, not because it wasn’t obvious exactly what had happened.
Nicole Jul 23rd 2008 at 09:55 am 7
Yes we saw it and we knew what happened. The real question is “so what?”
If she had ripped off JT’s shirt no one would have cared.
Why is a female nipple more obscene than a male nipple? And that ANY part of the human body is considered obscene is in it self obscene