Hey, why stop at one $550,000 fine to the CBS network? Let’s nail every CBS affiliate in the country at $50k a pop. That’ll learn’em.
And the FCC doesn’t regulate content of cable networks, so you’re out of luck there, too.
So we get both this bare bottom moment and the Jackson breat moment, all on the 6pm news (not to mention to promos too). Is the news considered a family show? Why aren’t kiwi kids going crazy over all this nudity? Oh, wait a minute, we have one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the developed world…down with primetime TV nudity!
Don’t you people understand!?!? Football is all about promoting violence, alcohol, and fatty foods, not sex! For Janet to show her breast like that would only have been appropriate it had been punched, had beer poured on it, or had her nipple been pierced by a cheeto.
coughcheerleaderscough
[voiceover]
CBS - Keeping abreast of events
[/v]
I rather liked the Aussie girl’s ass. She’s a cutie.
Prove that they don’t have Cheeto pierced nipples.
Hush, you are making me look stupid :mad:
If you wanted to get really silly about it, you could point out all of what is essentially groping that football players do after the ball is snapped with all of the homoerotic whatnot that comes with it, but that would just be too silly
CRUNCH!
munch
munch
munch
Not so, Captain.
I guess this is what it boils down to, nonsensical though it may be. The FCC only has the authority to fine CBS, and since they apparently feel that they’ve gotta fine somebody…
That it was a live broadcast in which (IMO) CBS could not have reasonably foreseen the baring of a naked tit does not appear to have been given any credence as a mitigating factor. Why, I am at a loss to explain.
:dubious: :dubious: :dubious:
Have you seen the outfits they wear?
It seems that a bunch of tits, were fined by some other tits, to protect a load of self righteous tits, who were exposed to a bit of a tit, by a complete pair of tits.
Wow, that never happens at our Westfield Shoppingtowns.
Yes I have, but I was hoping you would provide links to some pictures. You know, to refresh my memory. 
Here’s the decision (in PDF), and please note this is a notice of apparent liability. Viacom will be free to argue the fine is too high or that they shouldn’t be blamed:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-209A1.pdf
And, the decision discusses why the fine is being imposed against just the Viacom licenses and not CBS affiliates. It says that Viacom was involved in planning the halftime show, and while they might not have known that the breast would be bared, they knew that that portion of the show was sexually provocative.
And let’s not forget the lawsuit filed by the man who claimed to have been served up a heapin’ helpin’ of Mental Anguish® by the sight of the Jackson Boobie™.
This man should be hit in the head with a brick. :rolleyes:
For a 1-1/2 inch nipple, thats $77,809.08 per a square inch, $11,204,508 per square foot, or $488,068,368,000 per acre…that’s some “prime” real estate…
I’m shocked that nobody has pointed this out yet, but it wasn’t truly a naked TIT. It had a pretty little sun adorning it 
Sam
Y’know what? If an affiliate, nervous about the inevitable randiness of the halftime show, had taken it upon themselves to locally delay CBS’s broadcast by ten seconds, just in case, and had been able to cut the video feed so as to avoid showing that horrible, horrible mammary gland to the public, they would have gotten thousands of complaints from people disappointed at their inability to participate in the national brouhaha. You can’t win here, folks.
It’s also worth mentioning that the BoobFlash is the #1 most replayed moment in TiVo history. Says something, I think. “Oh look how horrible it is! Let’s watch it again. Oh my God that’s disgusting. Roll it back. Damn, this just keeps getting worse and worse. One more time…” :rolleyes: