CBS Head Says Would Fight Fines Over Janet Jackson

[hightime]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Viacom Inc. co-president and CBS chairman Leslie Moonves vowed on Sunday to fight any fines levied against CBS-owned TV stations for airing Janet Jackson's breast-baring Super Bowl performance in February.
In defiant remarks to television critics at their annual summer meeting, Moonves said the government's crackdown on indecency on the airwaves since Jackson's notorious flash of nudity on his network is "coming dangerously close to infringing" on free speech.

He said the notion of fining stations for airing the live Super Bowl halftime telecast on Feb. 1 is "patently ridiculous, and we're not going to stand for it."

"We're going to take it up to the courts if that happens," Moonves said, when asked about media reports that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission staff has proposed fines totaling $550,000 against 20 CBS-owned stations over the Super Bowl telecast.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/040718/11/py9i.html

[nolabels]

1. Maybe we could start a counter class action suit against the FCC also

The abridgment of several points in the Bill of Rights for starters :mad:

[Moloch]

2. Hmmmm...

Janet Jackson's nipple bad.
Lying and Misleading the public to incite a war through biased coverage good.

[TahitiNut]

3. I really doubt anyone saw much of anything in the orginal broadcast.

Most if not all of the TITillation was in the perverted repeats on top of repeats on top of repeats.

"I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you, that Janet has tits!!" (sheesh!) :eyes:
(Didn't these people get enough breast-feeding??)

[madrchsod]

5. i`m shocked!!

they were real! now that is truly shocking..but really she is the nicest looking of all the jackson`s and the not as insane as the others,to bad she can`t sing worth a crap...

[nolabels]

7. Didn't these people get enough breast-feeding?

Raised on a cow and the bottle or raised on the bosom, only thing i can figure out (from watching old home B&W silent movies) is that i got got plenty pissed off when somebody tried to take my pacifier away between the ages of of one and two :cry:



http://members.ozemail.com.au/~peterv/bb/

[BOHICA06]

4. Hey, I want $20 for

just watching such a piece of sh!t half-time show. Forget the fine ... I think MCI was the sponsor. About 1 month after the show, I get a phone solicitation - I tell the poor telemarketer, "Nope, not till you get CBS to refund the $9,000,000 you spent on that sorry show!!!" Ahhh...capitalism!!!

[moof]

6. Ok let's see if we have this straight

The CBS Head, Moonves might come to blows over the job janet jackson did Because of a crack down at the government ?

[bluestateguy]

8. Selective backbone

Where was that fighting spirit when the conservative white men hounded the Reagan's miniseries off the air.

[saracat]

9. There was no actual cost to CBS involved.

This $550,000 fine pinches their wallet!

[Massacure]

10. But it is a slap in the fact as well

If anyone gets fined it should be Janet Jackson -- Not CBS.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

13. Or Siebel Edmunds, or the Moveon.org ad.....

or Leslie Stahl's implying that JK and JE are gay???

:puke:

[leesa]

11. But he won't fight the treasonous Bush. Imagine that!

[saracat]

12. Because, as opposed to the fine,

That could cost advertising revenue!

[qb]

14. I hope he tells the FCC to "Get Cheneyed!" nt

[ixion]

15. here's a good example of how corporations have more power than individuals

in this country.

If you're an individual, and you are fined, and you don't pay the fines, a warrant is issued for your arrest in short order.

However, if you're a corporation, you can just 'resist' the fines.

Somehow, that just doesn't seem right to me, in a country where corporations are given the representation an individual is supposed to have. :-(