MyFox

ad link

CrankyMan's Blog

by CrankyMan from Zephyrhills

Last Post 155 days, 5 hours Ago

FCC spanked BIGTIME

Jul 21, 2008 | 4:53 PM
Category: News

Report This Post

The U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals has soundly spanked the FCC for their outrageous fine of over half a million dollars for CS-T showing 9/16 of a second of Janet Jackson's breast.

Basically, the court made note of the fact that the FCC had for decades ignored "fleeting expletives" and had never publicly announced any change in their enforcement standards. They called the sudden move, in the face of a well-organized campaign by the religious right both arbitrary and capricious.

As well, they told the FCC that its rulemaking failed to show CBS had any "scienter knowledge" of the supposed wardobe malfunction. Scienter knowledge is a concept that the offender had "guilty knowledge" when the offense was committed.

The 102 page decision didn't surprise many people who understand regulatory law. Feel free to read it yourself, it is on the Court's website http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/063575p.pdf.

17 Comments | Add a Comment

Jul 21, 2008 | 7:54 PM

I agree with the FCC. How dare anyone show even a hint of something as disgusting as a yabow. My life was ruined forever after seeing that. My shrink says I'll probably never recover. I think it's responsible for the high gas prices and the president of Iran acting like a third grader on acid. I...... I just can't go on.

yellowdog

Jul 21, 2008 | 10:01 PM

Me too Vit.

The sight of Janet's 28AA made me hunger for a nice set of boobs and I have spent over a million dollars stuffing bills down the g-strings of strippers ever since.

CrankyMan

Jul 21, 2008 | 11:32 PM

Your Dogness, and Vittorio, as this incident happened in early 2004, I think it is pretty safe to say that both of you were corrupted bar before the "wardrobe malfunction."

I was expecting a little more elation over the FCC getting solidly reprimanded by a court over this whole matter.

And, what do you think of the FCC caving in to the religious right?

Flippy

Jul 22, 2008 | 3:28 AM

CrankyMan, I am sorry. I am laughing so hard over your screen name!

How entertaining! You do not look cranky in your avatar!

Janet showed a breast. So what? Do we not nurse our children from these dreaded things?

Why is it such a shock to see a female breast? If you think about it, a breast is the first thing most children in the world see.

What is the big deal? They saw it again after they no longer need it? What a joke.

FloydFreak

Jul 22, 2008 | 5:26 AM

Flippy: You just do not know him. OMG...is he EVER cranky!

IMHO, we should see lots MORE female breasts. That way, we can make our own judgments as to who's we want to see more of.

And in closing, CM, BLEEP you!

yellowdog

Jul 22, 2008 | 8:41 AM

Bleep you?

Freak must have changed his middle name to Cheney instead of Hussein.

Breasts do distract some guys, Crank.

To the subject :this IS a great example of the Falwellian influence on the reign of Dick and Dumb. It is SO overboard and outrageous as to serve only to illustrate the inherent danger of radicals sneaking into positions of power.

Another disturbing fact : during the misadventure of former AG Alberto Gonzalez, Liberty University Law School (the brainchild of Jerry himself) supplied more new hires to the Justice Department than any other Law school. Hopefully these trained narrow minds will exit Government service in 1-09 along with their bosses..

Vittorio

Jul 22, 2008 | 8:43 AM

I thought what we said WAS elation. Corrupted?

MoonOwl

Jul 22, 2008 | 8:56 AM

Yay! Another example that sanity may be making a comeback! KewlBeans!

CrankyMan

Jul 22, 2008 | 9:41 AM

Flippy, thank you for the kind words.

You highlight a great point. The argument against showing a bare breast on TV is that "children may be watching."

But breasts ARE for children. Do they seriously think that babies should be blindfolded before dinner? It makes no sense.

Of course there's the argument that breasts are a bit like toy train sets. They're intended for children, but fathers wind up playing with them too.

yellowdog

Jul 22, 2008 | 11:22 AM

I gave up trains about the same time I became interested in breasts.

CrankyMan

Jul 22, 2008 | 11:34 AM

Some folks manage to maintain an interest in both, YD.

yellowdog

Jul 22, 2008 | 4:55 PM

Lucky ducks.

FloydFreak

Jul 23, 2008 | 5:12 AM

How do you think that the term "training bra" evolved?

Is this one thing that we can blame on Bush before his highness ascends the throne? Oh wait - he already HAS, hasn't he?

And who says blogging isn't educational? I learned a new word - "scienter". And here I thought that it was something that I wanted to be when I grew up - a scienter.

Flippy

Jul 24, 2008 | 11:41 PM

You guys have such dirty minds. Yes the female breasts are for the sole purpose of feeding newborn children. But you dirty men have other uses for them. You are all sick. Hehehe.

You are all alike, and that is why a Janet BLEEP that was flashed for less than a second became such a big deal.

I am sure no woman protested that. But if you guys love it so much, who protested it?

Women would not protest it. Men would not protest it.

Who protested it? Who was offended?

Flippy

Jul 24, 2008 | 11:44 PM

I can't find the word scienter in any dictionary. What is the definition?

CrankyMan

Jul 25, 2008 | 12:52 AM

Scienter would likely be found in a legal dictionary or a Latin dictionary. In Latin it means "knowingly"

This definition pretty well sums it up:

"Guilty knowledge that is sufficient to charge a person with the consequences of his or her acts."

I.e. if CBS did not know that there was going to be a flash of bosom - then they had no scienter knowledge of the event and thus they should not be convicted of any wrongdoing.

I hope that helps.

Flippy

Jul 26, 2008 | 3:04 AM

Yes thank you! I understand. I have learned a new word also.

Page 1 of 1

Write your comment below: Email me when a new comment is added to this entry

CrankyMan

Fat, bald, retired. Hey! I'm doing the best that I can.

Member Since: 1/7/2007

ad link

View All Photos

RSS: What is RSS?

Many pages in this Fox Television Stations, Inc. web site feature links to other sites, some of which are operated by companies unrelated to Fox Television Stations, Inc. Fox Television Stations, Inc. has no control over the content or availability of any linked site.

Inside Fox:
About FOX 35 Find it Here Mornings What's on FOX Contests