Scott Bradford: Off on a Tangent

A Half-Second of Nipple Is Not Indecency

Posted July 21, 2008 8:32pm ET

The Associated Press reports (via WTOPNews.com) that a federal appeals court has tossed the half-million dollar fine levied by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) against CBS for the brief (9/16ths of a second) display of Janet Jackson’s right nipple on national television in 2004. The court ruled that a brief exposure unintentionally broadcast does not amount to actionable indecency.

I’ve said it a few times before, but I’ll say it again: Janet Jackson’s nipple didn’t hurt anybody. It might be news to the censorship brigades at the FCC and elsewhere, but most people—even children!—have nipples, know what they look like, and aren’t particularly bothered by them.

Having said that, CBS and the NFL should have used discretion when green-lighting a halftime show that was pretty raunchy (and vacuous, even by halftime standards) to be broadcast to potentially millions of children. I concede that point without debate. But poor discretion and an unintentional 9/16ths-of-a-second display of a nipple on national television is not an actionable offense for the FCC to issue fines over. Adults can choose to not watch, nor let their children watch, CBS programming from now on if it’s really that big an issue.

Better yet, talk to your children. Teach them. Don’t focus so much on ‘protecting’ them from reality, try teaching them how to handle reality. That’s how they grow up to be well-adjusted adults, unlike those who went crying to mommy-government-FCC when they saw a nipple on TV for a fraction of a second.

Comments

  1. Chris Schaab says:

    The real question is who painstakingly looked over the footage, frame-by-frame, and even some mystical sub-frame (NTSC is 29.97 frames per second, commonly rounded to 30, 9/16th of second is then 16.9 frames, I know, I’m being funny). Maybe there are some good jobs at the FCC yet.

  2. Well, I’m going to assume the nipple was on the screen for 17 frames (I’m not going to dig up a video and confirm), which is going to be about 0.5672 seconds (17 / 29.97). Meanwhile, 9/16ths of a second going to be about 0.5625 seconds.

    So the difference between 9/16ths of a second and 17 NTSC frames is a whopping 0.0047 seconds. 9/16ths is probably a fair approximation, and it sounds better than 17/29.97ths.

    :-)

Archives

Random Links

For the whole list of links, go to the links page! (Note: A link is not necessarily an endorsement.)

Have a Quote

Loading...

Scott Bradford has been building web sites and using them to say what he thinks since 1995, which tended to get him in trouble with power-tripping assistant principals at the time. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Public Administration from George Mason University, but has spent most of his career (so far) working on public- and private-sector web sites. He is not a member of any political party, and brands himself an ‘independent constitutional conservative.’ In addition to holding down a day job and blogging about challenging subjects like politics, religion, and technology, Scott is also a devout Catholic, gun-owner, bike rider, and music lover with a wife and two cats.

Like what you're reading?

Please consider making a small donation to support Off on a Tangent.
Also please be sure to 'like' us on Facebook!