• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

CBS May Be Fined $550,000 for Jackson Flap


Benevolent Dictator
DP Veteran
May 19, 2004
Reaction score
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Source: Yahoo News

WASHINGTON - CBS could face a fine of $550,000 for airing Janet Jackson's breast-baring performance during the Super Bowl, a person familiar with the matter said Wednesday.

According to the source, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, a staff recommendation to the Federal Communications Commission (news - web sites) suggests each of the 20 CBS-owned stations be fined the maximum indecency penalty of $27,500 for the incident.

The staff did not recommend fining CBS affiliates that aired the Super Bowl show but are not owned by Viacom Inc., the parent company of CBS, the source said.

The commissioners now must decide whether to accept the recommendation. A decision is expected in the next few weeks.

FCC (news - web sites) spokesman David Fiske declined to comment.

Calls to CBS and Viacom seeking comment were not immediately returned.

Produced by MTV, the Feb. 1 Super Bowl halftime show featured Jackson and singer Justin Timberlake performing a flirtatious duet. At the end, Timberlake ripped off a piece of Jackson's black leather top, exposing her right breast to a TV audience of some 90 million.

The commission was flooded with more than 500,000 complaints.

There is no government definition of indecency. Federal law bars radio stations and over-the-air television channels from airing references to sexual and excretory functions between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when children may be tuning in. When a complaint is made, the FCC determines whether the incident was indecent.

The rules do not apply to cable and satellite channels or satellite radio.

The FCC stepped up enforcement of indecency standards soon after the Jackson incident, slapping a $755,000 fine on Clear Channel Communications for a "Bubba the Love Sponge" broadcast and a record $1.75 million fine, also against Clear Channel, for indecency complaints against Howard Stern and other radio personalities.

Last week, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to increase the top fine to $275,000 per indecent incident with a limit of $3 million a day. The House passed a bill earlier that would set fines at $500,000. Differences between the two bills must be worked out.
Dats my boy Sam Johnson in the house. He was one of the sponsors for the house bill. He has updated me 3 times on this. Once after writting and twice - just because. Keep up the fine work.

What is truely sick is that since then Janet has gotten 3 major awards, commercial ads, and was on SNL. All because she broke the law.

What you do not hear in the media is that it was a planned event. Not accidental!


  • Baby_Dragon___Tabasco_by_jwohland.jpg
    92.6 KB · Views: 2
What you do not hear in the media is that it was a planned event. Not accidental!

And you know this was planned out in advance how? What are your sources? Where did you get the inside scoop?
Did you know that by making a statement like that you could be sued. Occording to all people involved with the show it was a wardrobe malfunction not planned so you are calling 100+ people liars and that could get very expensive in court.


  • evolution-evolution-charles-darwin-ftl-demotivational-poster-1288743300.jpg
    70.3 KB · Views: 2
  • ooooooooo.jpg
    77.9 KB · Views: 1
  • My%20Hair%20is%20a%20Bird_%20Your%20argument%20is%20invalid_.jpg
    42.2 KB · Views: 1
  • cat.jpg
    18.4 KB · Views: 1
  • 5127493578_6fbc0da79c_z.jpg
    43.1 KB · Views: 0
  • glenn-beck_crying.jpg
    88.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Jesse-Jackson-Crying.jpg
    10.5 KB · Views: 0
  • empirica.jpg
    70.8 KB · Views: 0
  • More-Funny-Cats-animal-humor-4186066-500-375.jpg
    40 KB · Views: 0
  • Muffin-cat.jpg
    42.2 KB · Views: 0
  • b-405726-Funny_People.jpg
    31 KB · Views: 1
  • Jackie-Chan-Meme.jpg
    23.7 KB · Views: 0
They said the wardrobe removal was planned. Sources: CNN, Yahoo, Justin Timerlake right after the event...etc... Then an 'accident' occured. Give me a damn break, like someone would wear a device like that without showing it.

Regardless if it was an accident - it was ILLEGAL! She should have been dragged out and handcuffed like the streaker to let the courts decide.

Notice - she is not calling foul to this fine.

Did you know that by making a statement like that you could be sued.

What statement? That she broke the law?


  • gf.jpg
    32.8 KB · Views: 142
  • gf2.jpg
    30.7 KB · Views: 199
  • pond_me.jpg
    41.3 KB · Views: 154
  • pond_friends.jpg
    44.2 KB · Views: 113
  • pond_snakes.jpg
    54.8 KB · Views: 129
  • me1.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 854
  • Feb2012.jpg
    48 KB · Views: 222
  • moto_2092.jpg
    42.9 KB · Views: 102
  • arrow and maize at pond.jpg
    arrow and maize at pond.jpg
    40.1 KB · Views: 99
  • intercropped wood.jpg
    intercropped wood.jpg
    53.8 KB · Views: 108
  • looking downhill.jpg
    looking downhill.jpg
    43 KB · Views: 121
  • 27mar12.jpg
    72.2 KB · Views: 243
  • Dec. '11.jpg
    Dec. '11.jpg
    40 KB · Views: 116
  • Dec. '11(2).jpg
    Dec. '11(2).jpg
    31.1 KB · Views: 196
  • Cheers2.jpg
    32.9 KB · Views: 236
  • Cheers.jpg
    37.1 KB · Views: 237
I have to wonder if it was a white nipple would you have been so outraged or was it the fact that shes black that you have such an issue with.

Where did that come from?
Male/female or blue, green, purple - it doesn't matter.

If you call it an accident - so be it.
It was WRONG and it should have been taken care of. Personally, I do not want to see "accidents" like that during family public broadcasted events. Even if it were Pamela Anderson, Laura Prepon, Britney Spears, or Laura Bush.

As you say, take out the incentive - fine the hell out of the stations and they won't put her filth on anymore.

My 2 pennies.
vauge said:
Notice - she is not calling foul to this fine.

Of course she's not.... she doesn't have pay it...

vauge said:
What statement? That she broke the law?

I think what he's referring to is the statement that showing her nipple on public TV was planned. Saying that she intentionally planned to show her nipple on public TV without any proof could be considered slander.

I personally think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I think they added the ripping the leather off without telling anyone, but I imagine the plan was to have the red lace stay behind to cover her up. Of course, I have no proof of this either, but just my hunch.
Hey hey hey... with the race card...
I have to wonder if it was a white nipple would you have been so outraged or was it the fact that shes black that you have such an issue with.
What her color has to do with anything? We're talking indecent exposure during primetime public broadcasting. That's inexcusable for even Hillary Clinton (she's in my fantasy). No sir, if investigation proved that it was planned so fined they should be.
By the way did you know Janet's brother is white...ahhhhhhh!


  • the****isthisshit.jpg
    8.2 KB · Views: 32
  • image.jpg
    86.2 KB · Views: 32
  • didn'treadlol.jpg
    19.5 KB · Views: 38
Top Bottom