Waitaminute, the episodes in question were broadcast in 2002, and now, in late December 2004 the FCC is just getting around to saying, "You shouldn't have done that and we're fining you"?
[bleep] that -- there ought to be a statute of limitations on indecency violations, if for no other reason than the possibility of another station saying, "Well, what that first station did must have been okay, since they didn't get in trouble for it," then getting nailed for something they broadcast in the year between the example and the reaction to it.
If it wasn't objectionable enough to warrant a timely response, was it really objectionable enough to warrant any punitive response?
(Note that this is separate from the "we're going to fine you but it'll take a while for all the arm-wrestling to be completed" aspect. IF I'm reading that news report correctly, it sounds like the FCC only just now got around to telling the stations that what they did was wrong.)
Er, the name of the show was "Naked Twister", but the reason it got fined was because of explicit interviews with porn stars.
I felt the need to clarify this because my brain spasmed at the idea of banning "nudity" on an auditory medium. What, you have to wear clothes in the broadcast booth?
No, they haven't (yet) jumped off that cliff. They're still on the old topic of talking about sex.
This seems sorta relevant:
http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/4019483/detail.html
Re: This seems sorta relevant:
[bleep] that -- there ought to be a statute of limitations on indecency violations, if for no other reason than the possibility of another station saying, "Well, what that first station did must have been okay, since they didn't get in trouble for it," then getting nailed for something they broadcast in the year between the example and the reaction to it.
If it wasn't objectionable enough to warrant a timely response, was it really objectionable enough to warrant any punitive response?
(Note that this is separate from the "we're going to fine you but it'll take a while for all the arm-wrestling to be completed" aspect. IF I'm reading that news report correctly, it sounds like the FCC only just now got around to telling the stations that what they did was wrong.)
Re: This seems sorta relevant:
I felt the need to clarify this because my brain spasmed at the idea of banning "nudity" on an auditory medium. What, you have to wear clothes in the broadcast booth?
No, they haven't (yet) jumped off that cliff. They're still on the old topic of talking about sex.