Bare rear could cost ABC $1.4 million

[uspirate]

Link to full story

WASHINGTON - The Federal Communications Commission has proposed a $1.4 million fine against 52 ABC Television Network stations over a 2003 broadcast of cop drama NYPD Blue.

<****** language="javascript">f(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['.TvaEdGDJHA-']='&U=13bqb3d9u%2fN%3d.TvaEdGDJHA-%2fC%3d625864.12150598.12565772.1414694%2fD%3dLREC %2fB%3d5018132';

[uspirate]

didnt post for some reason
The fine is for a scene where a boy surprises a woman as she prepares to take a shower. The scene depicted "multiple, close-up views" of the woman's "nude buttocks" according to an agency order issued late Friday. ABC is owned by the Walt Disney Co. The fines were issued against 52 stations either owned by or affiliated with the network.
FCC's definition of indecent content requires that the broadcast "depicts or describes sexual or excretory activities" in a "patently offensive way" and is aired between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.
The agency said the show was indecent because "it depicts sexual organs and excretory organs — specifically an adult woman's buttocks."
The agency rejected the network's argument that "the buttocks are not a sexual organ."


I must have missed that episode, but does that last statement insinuate that the Agency is a bunch of anal loving Bisexuals and Nimphos?

[uspirate]

sorry, full story didnt post. but this part, The agency rejected the network's argument that "the buttocks are not a sexual organ." makes me wonder if the agency is just a bunch of anal taking Bi's and Nimphos?

[sailingdog]

This is a great example of the government and American society being exceptionally stupid about what makes sense... They're willing to fine ABC for showing a woman's naked ass on TV... when they don't do jack about all the gratuitous violence that is on TV every day...

Which is a child growing up far more likely to see in real life:

1) A woman's nude body
2) A man's nude body
3) A gun wielding man on a killing rampage
4) A guy with razor-equipped hands killing people...

My guess is that most children will eventually see 1 and 2, but probably not see 3 or 4... so what is the big deal?? Much of the prudery of the government traces back to the Christian conservatives... who can't stand the idea that humans are sexual beings and that sex is a part of the natural order of things... yet they don't seem to have any issues with the violence plaguing the mass media today. Stupid, stupid, stupid.... damn puritanical right wing whackos.

[Giulietta]

In my Country we say:

You made it...you deal with it....

meaning in this case...you guys allow all these laws to be passed and stuff now deal with them...

If not riot, rebel..BUT PLEASE DO SOMETHING, instead of pointing fingers and whine

[sailaway21]

Dog's argument loses it's validity, but not it's morality, by implying that if one is allowed, violence, then there's nothing inherently wrong with allowing the other. Neither graphic violence nor sex should be allowed on broadcast TV between 6am-10pm.

I personally don't believe that broadcast TV is the appropriate venue for artists and actors to be pushing the envelope. But then, I'm not a huge fan of TV programming in general.

One of the great things about satellite tv is that it enabled me to set my TV menu. I didn't have to have Madonna prancing about in her underwear in my living room. I could get those channels, but was able to edit them out of the menu as if we did not. As a result my daughter became convinced that TV consisted of news, sports, shows about strange animals from Africa, and old movies. She's not a big TV viewer, probably as a result. Which is one less thing I have to worry about distracting her while she's in college. I'm still trying to edit her boy programming with much less success. (g)

If I recall correctly, some TV stations editted the program themselves or did not show that episode. I'm sure some regarded it as 'essential" to the artistic sense of the program. They'd probably be distressed to learn that most of us little recall the program, much less the buttocks. Funny how publicity stunts can seem so rightfully full of self importance at the time, in an otherwise forgettable endeavor.

[xort]

There are 5 replies listed but all I show is the initial post? Have all replies been blocked?

[AboardIndigo]

If the quotes are accurate, ABC didn't break the rules by the FCC's own definitions.

Regardless, I'm all for seeing MORE rears during prime time programming.