FCC in States to raise fines on "Indecency"

[404 Not Found]

The new law, which boosts fines to as much as $325,000 per violation from $32,500, could help congressional Republicans woo conservatives in a tough election year as they have faced ebbing support from key core constituencies.

The Christian Coalition had placed legislation to increase the fines as the No. 5 item on its 2006 legislative agenda. The new law also caps any continuing violations from an incident at $3 million.

This cracks me up, not a suprise, as the effects of these actions they feel are morally corrupting the youth & fabric of our society.

Ok...I could understand if somehow the program you are watching was interrupted by someone doing a defined act of sexual debauchery...trying not to be graphic for the kids here.

But when you have children watching the news every day and seeing a murder take place on a daily basis, not to leave out drive by shooting and crack dealers on many corners of the urban streets that relate to your every day life walking to school, how is someone saying a 4 letter word or the exposure of Janet Jackson's breast in the Super Bowl 1/2, of which the air time of this event lasted a total of 2 seconds on TV, going to morally corrupt society itself?

Such legislation is waste of time and perhaps if the parents did their jobs as being a parent rather than asking the Govt. to do it for them it would not even be an issue.

The FCC is a waste of time and tax payers monies in a society corrupt in the issues of what in most societies would be of greater importance.

Soon, Art museums will need to place covers or pasties over nude painting and sculptures.

The full story is on CNN HERE

[tugs]

that's awesome. hahaha.

at least it's still the courts that decide on the actual penalties per case. i mean unless they have it spelled out in the law, ($25000 per visible tit, $50000 if there's a nipple, i'd say maybe $75000 if you see a woman's genitalia but $100000 for a man's because they're that much grosser)

really, though. a broadcasting corporation doesnt see this as penalty for stuff like superbowl, it's just purchasing the right to show smut.

[Subjugation]

I dunno...I was kind of pissed off about the Janet Jackson thing.

Not like---fuming with Christian outrage, but I was offended that this bitch who looks like Michael "The Molester" Jackson exposed her old, floppy titty for the sake of a marketing strategy. So, of course I wanted the FCC to drop the hammer on her, but for all the wrong reasons. It was more like a Schadenfreude thing than a morally offended thing.

[404 Not Found]

That's why they had to broadcast in delay after that event.

New rule for a new era of broadcasting. I just think that it has been dealt with already and that this rule should just be a common understood, as well as mandatory function, for a live televised event. Would it still be Live TV? Is that the only or main concern for broadcasters?

The time taken, to waste as well as flounder costs, will be serving the population in a more productive and immediate function..... how?

[ÆNIMA]

I saw the Colbert Report when he announced that. He now owes the FCC about 3 times that sum.

[tugs]

maybe the law should simply be changed so that the fines are only in place for the indecent exposure of ugly people.

that'd deal with all arguments i bet.

[404 Not Found]

The FCC is just a ridiculous supplimental branch of the U.S Govt. A waste of taxpayers monies that go to support an organization as well as the salary of these hack's that decide what is to be censored. I just do not think that they have ever watched the world news or evel local urban news stations, as this has a daily impact on a child more so than a glimpe of Jackson's boob.

Content and visual depiction seems to be deciding factors. So the glimpse of Janet Jacksons boob on tv for 2 seconds is more damaging than a child watching soap operas, the evening/world news or visiting an art museum?

If they think that the Super Bowl incident will have such an effect on children that they will need to commit crime and become murdering drug addicts, then so be it.

[Subjugation]

If they think that the Super Bowl incident will have such an effect on children that they will need to commit crime and become murdering drug addicts, then so be it.

No, that's what Grand Theft Auto is for.