$550K "Wardrobe Malfunction" Fine Tossed

Court: FCC Acted Aribtrarily By Fining CBS For Janet Jackson's Super Bowl Breast-Baring Stunt

(CBS/AP)  A federal appeals court on Monday threw out a $550,000 indecency fine against CBS Corp. for the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show that ended with Janet Jackson's breast-baring "wardrobe malfunction."

The three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Federal Communications Commission "acted arbitrarily and capriciously" in issuing the fine for the fleeting image of nudity.

The 90 million people watching the Super Bowl, many of them children, heard Justin Timberlake sing, "Gonna have you naked by the end of this song," as he reached for Jackson's bustier.

The court found that the FCC deviated from its nearly 30-year practice of fining indecent broadcast programming only when it was so "pervasive as to amount to 'shock treatment' for the audience."

"Like any agency, the FCC may change its policies without judicial second-guessing," the court said. "But it cannot change a well-established course of action without supplying notice of and a reasoned explanation for its policy departure."

The 3rd Circuit judges - Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica, Judge Marjorie O. Rendell and Judge Julio M. Fuentes - also ruled that the FCC deviated from its long-held approach of applying identical standards to words and images when reviewing complaints of indecency.

"The Commission's determination that CBS's broadcast of a nine-sixteenths of one second glimpse of a bare female breast was actionably indecent evidenced the agency's departure from its prior policy," the court found. "Its orders constituted the announcement of a policy change - that fleeting images would no longer be excluded from the scope of actionable indecency."

A CBS spokeswoman said the company was working on a statement Monday morning. Messages left for an FCC spokesman were not immediately returned.

---

Photos: Halftime Performers Steal The Show

---

The FCC argued that Jackson's nudity, albeit fleeting, was graphic and explicit and CBS should have been forewarned. Jackson has said the decision to add a costume reveal - exposing her right breast, which had only a silver sunburst "shield" covering her nipple - came after the final rehearsal.

At the time, broadcasters did not employ a video delay for live events, a policy remedied within a week of the game.

In challenging the fine, CBS said that "fleeting, isolated or unintended" images should not automatically be considered indecent.

But the FCC argued that Jackson and Timberlake were employees of CBS and that the network should have to pay for their "willful" actions, given its lack of oversight.

In June 2007, a federal appeals court in New York invalidated the government's policy on fleeting profanities uttered over the airwaves. The case involved remarks made by Cher and Nicole Richie on awards shows carried on Fox stations.

[jtdev1]

Chaulk up another win for Corporate America...

[talkingham]

You can see more skin at any beach or swimming pool this summer and their will be plenty of children present at each location. Colin Powell''s son, appointed head of the FCC at the time was just another stupid neocon hack at work.

Of course watching a bunch of millionaire deviants run around in tight pants for 3 hours knocking the u-know-what out of each is perfectly holsom!

[texanforlogi]

If this show deserved an obscenity fine then it should have been for the staging of a simulated rape and not for a microsecond flash of a boob. A stimulated rape was the most offensive thing I''ve ever seen connected with a Super Bowl and the censors that approved it should be paying the fine. The boob was nothing--it was the least offensive moment of the entire song.

[wdrussell1]

Since they allow childish violence on TV, the FCC should forfeit their right to censor anything.

[antoniof123]

In June 2007, a federal appeals court in New York invalidated the government''s policy on fleeting profanities uttered over the airwaves. The case involved remarks made by Cher and Nicole Richie on awards shows carried on Fox stations.

Well, neo cons looks like the courts will not give you good for the goose but not for the gander.

What a joke grow up wing nuts it is just a brest.

[legacyabq]

jerryomara:
You''ve got that right!!!
Good lord, I can''t beleive this is the 21st century. OH MY GOD, WE SAW A BREAST EREAST WITH A COVERED NIPPLE! NOT A NIPPLE! NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!
We are one childish, rediculous, and embarrassingly prudish society..

[inventagod2]

The neocon son of traitor Colin Powell was just blowing smoke so we did not concentrate on the atrocity his dad was participating in.
Janet, and her boob, was nothing compared to the disgusting Republicon greed-fest that is now Iraq/Afghanistan...
...and don''t get me started on Cheneys PNAC attack on 9/11... a hanging offense if there ever was one.

[bobnjersey]

[It was entirely the fault of that cretin Justin Timberlake. What I saw was him first put his paw on her breast (inappropriate in itself) and then violently RIP that part of her dress, it was no accident. HE is entirely to blame, and he doesn''''t even have the cojones to admit it.]
[Posted by diatreme at 12:21 PM : Jul 21, 2008]

for a cretin ... he''s doing pretty well for himself ... lots of money ... hot babes ... many hit records ... gets to touch breast and rip off clothes on national tv ... and all that for just some dancing around and singing.

your jealous ... aren''t you?

[buttonjockey]

: Jackson has said the decision to add a costume reveal - exposing her right breast,
: which had only a silver sunburst "shield" covering her nipple - came after
: the final rehearsal.

So she''s admitted it was intentional and not a "malfunction".... I already knew this as you''ll soon see.

: CBS said that "fleeting, isolated or unintended"
: images should not automatically be considered indecent.

It WAS intended. When anything objectionable appears suddenly in a live broadcast, it takes about a second or so for the director to notice and to call a remedy such as cutting to black. The technical director (the guy actually hitting the buttons) adds about a 3/4 second delay to that. If the "malfunction" was unexpected, we should have seen it for about 2 seconds before the cut to black. However, only "nine-sixteenths of one second" elapsed instead.

I know all this because I work in broadcast television. Not only that, I just happened to work a very short time later in a production truck that carried the EVS machine that was on the half time show. The EVS is a device like your Tivo except that it is far more powerful and is often used to record multiple camera angles at once (independent of what''s on the air). The half-time crew did not clear the EVS after the show so we got to see several different angles of the "event" without the cut to black. I''ve seen what viewers didn''t. Janet just stood there, not hiding it or running off stage, just letting it hang out. She was not surprised.

[barbaram99]

I really did not see it as I don''t watch football, Love baseball. I have heard worse said on TV. the man singing with Janet Jackson had no business messing with her dress. Janet she picked that awful outfit. They both are the blame.
a brit telling the US to grow up. I am 53. i am female and yes we have breasts. They are for nusring a baby. I never had kids. i have access to bbc America.

[txgrouch2006]

Janet Jackson has now admitted that IT WAS INTENTIONAL, she INTENTIONALLY WORE A COSTUME TO BREAK OPEN LIKE THIS.

Blaming Justin - that''s just STOOPID.

[reedtaz73]

It''s ok for children to watch shootings, dead bodies, and all out physical violence on tv but one breast and FCC is in an uproar...Please, someone ask these idiots if Chaka Zulu is to be aired again, will they be editing out all the african breasts and booty?
Doubled standard morons...

[bladdy10]

I am looking forward to the day when George Bushes brand of religion and the morality police are sent back down south to preach shame guilt and fear there. Good Riddance to their nonsense.

[txgrouch2006]

This is SICK. I GUARANTEE that there will now be "fleeting nudity" AT LEAST ONCE EVERY 30 MINUTES during prime time.

What utter nonsense for the court to allow INTENTIONAL nudity, no matter how "fleeting."

[nothappyatall]

"Janet Jackson has now admitted that IT WAS INTENTIONAL, she INTENTIONALLY WORE A COSTUME TO BREAK OPEN LIKE THIS."

So the FCC should fine HER not CBS, it wasn''t their fault in any case.

The whole thing is nothing more than a cash grab by the Govt, $550,000 fine is a joke, good that it was tossed.

[txgrouch2006]

reedtaz73 wrote
It''''s ok for children to watch shootings, dead bodies, and all out physical violence on tv
-------------
Who said it was OK? We''re just addressing as many problems as we can, one at a time.

[kennedy7955]

We are a strange country. Show a persons head blown off on prime time tv and there is no problem. Show a breast and millions of watchers become unglued. The Puritan sense of decency is shameful and pervades our tv sets.

[kennedy7955]

Who said it was OK? We''''re just addressing as many problems as we can, one at a time. Posted by txgrouch2006"

Who said? The FCC said so...duh...

[txgrouch2006]

newster1 wrote
So the FCC should fine HER not CBS
-------------
The company is responsible for what it broadcasts. What was with a no-delay live broadcast anway???

Fining the individual affects only that individual. Fining the company gives them the incentive to be more careful about EVERYTHING they broadcast.

BTW, the FCC licenses the company, not the individual.

[txgrouch2006]

kennedy7759 wrote
The FCC said so...duh...
-----------------
And I don''t agree with the FCC about that. Duh?

[kennedy7955]

What utter nonsense for the court to allow INTENTIONAL nudity, no matter how "fleeting." Posted by txgrouch2006"

What is so wrong with a little nudity? Notice I didn''t say sexual intercourse. We make nudity such a big deal when it is nothing.

If you want to get upset by what is on tv, go after the violence which is truly indecent.

[smiley676]

txgrouch2006

There didn''t use to be a delay. That is a new policy after the "wardrobe malfunctions" and other incidences that bothered audiences.

A fine of this magnitude is an abuse of power. This wasn''t a plan. It was an accident. 9/16 of a second. Most people didn''t even know what they saw.

No fine was warranted. But a fine of that magnitude was nothing more than a show of power.

[smiley676]

We shouldn''t even have an FCC. Hasn''t anyone read the First Amendment lately?

[beader59]

Oh, I see, the lyrics are so suggestive that you don''t have to see a thing to get aroused, the cheerleaders show so much of their ***** that it is oaky though, and kids see and hear much worse than Jackson''s partial boob display, but let''s make this a national disaster. Oh brother!

[erasmus81]

They both are the blame.
Posted by BarbaraM99 at 01:14 PM : Jul 21, 2008

I agree. I don''t believe it was an accident.

[sayso2]

The incident added nothing to the performance. What, a fleeting glimpse of a boob? Anyone with an ounce of talent doesn''t need a salacious gimmick like that. Surely her and her brother can do better with their god given talent.

[ksjeff-2009]

What convoluted logic this country employs.

The bare breast of a beautiful woman is deemed "obscene", but the burned, decapitated body of a soldier is commomplace on the evening news.

We are a morally befert country run by savages.

[xmanborg]

The FCC are a bunch of IDIOTS completely controled by the Bush White House.

[xxunknown]

that whole Jackson family gives me the creepies. Ick.

[u-r-right]

I agree with most posters here. I saw the incident when it happened and I thought it was just a crappy dance and singing routine performed by mediocre talent. I knew all along it had to be intentional. There was no malfunction. Our country needs to take away all hang-ups regarding nudity. Take away the "sin" and "evil" attitude towards nudity and I''ll bet there would be a lot less perverts running around.

[no2zeebas]

Maybe the one who should be fined for the ugly teat episode is the one responsible...Tacky Jacko...It was her ugly teat that was uncovered, I think the offending teat should be cut off and fired into space aboard the next available space shuttle flight...

[nssherlock1]

While it is ALWAYS nice to see a boob, hers were not worth $550k. I say $3 and call it even.

[andor3]

somebody should fine every whacko who was troubled enough by half a second of a bare female breast to complain to CBS or the FCC.

I mean a monetary fine in addition to the penalty of us all laughing at their ridiculous puritanical prudishness.

[l8c6]

Our country needs to take away all hang-ups regarding nudity. Take away the "sin" and "evil" attitude towards nudity and I''''ll bet there would be a lot less perverts running around.

Posted by u-r-right

Our "american society" needs something for sure but even in countries that do not have the baggage this country does around sexual matters there is a time and place for everything. There are countries where men and women are nude together in public saunas and people aren''t doing the mating dance around each other for all to see. I think the incident was deceptive. It occurred dishonestly, it was tacky, trashy and tasteless. What has been happening in the U.S. over time is prudishness is being replaced with vulgarity. Someday, maybe this nation will find balance around sexual matters and some form of classiness will be restored.

[neobrian-2009]

Just Like OUR Dicck

What a Puritan country we are when it comes to s e x. It''''s embarrassing (notice how I had to type s e x broken up because CBS sensors even that word).

Posted by rafterman1 at 02:28 PM : Jul 21, 1954
Is NOT Cheney`s Name D I C K ? Or Is He One ?

[usclimey]

It occurred dishonestly, it was tacky, trashy and tasteless.

Posted by l8c6

Just like the music it was set to. Notice the organizers of the Superbowl have only found British performers (Macca & the Stones) suitable for the great American game since?

Given the violent garbage that gets an "R" rating and the stupid fuss about things like language and ssexx in this country, it''s no wonder kids grow feeling confused.

[talkingham]

It wasn''t even a bare breast, it had a pastie on it--

Can someone please tell me how this is signficantly sexually different than the Women''s Beach Volleyball tour we see on NBC all summer with primarily gay women wearing as little as possible playing a two-person/team volleyball in their water panties? Does anyone really play 2-person/team beach volleyball except for NBC?

[txgrouch2006]

smiley676 wrote
There didn''''t use to be a delay.
---------------
YES, there WAS, years ago.

The delay was eliminated to make it "more live."

It was only a matter of time before some sleazy performer took advantage of it. Janet Jackson became that sleazy performer.

The result - the broadcast delay was brought back.

[txgrouch2006]

talkingham wrote
It wasn''''t even a bare breast, it had a pastie on it--------------------
In most cities, that would be called "topless dancing."

If you need a city permit and an I.D. check to do it, it doesn''t belong on broadcast TV.

[omded]

Who cares? Janet is a beautiful woman. God created her that way. I doubt anyone was really hurt by what happened. You people who can''t accept God''s art need to get a life and apologize to God for insulting his creation. As for me, I just give thanks for the beauty.

[thisandthat1]

Why even have an FCC if the courts are going to undermine it''s authority and overturn their decisions? Just let everybody get on TV and say or do whatever they want to and I bet the first people who scream bloody murder are all these phonies posting comments on here about how it''s no big deal!

[deacon20081]

FCC shoul ban Spandex on big women if they want to do something worth while.

[nolalou]

Who said it was OK? We''''re just addressing as many problems as we can, one at a time.
Posted by txgrouch2006

The mere fact that a momentary flashing of a breast on television is something you consider a problem worth spending one second of time worrying about, shows the person with the problem is YOU!

[txgrouch2006]

thisandthat1 wrote
I bet the first people who scream bloody murder are all these phonies posting comments on here about how it''''s no big deal!
-----------
I wonder how many of them are being paid by CBS.

[nssherlock1]

FCC shoul ban Spandex on big women if they want to do something worth while.
Posted by deacon20081


That''s an idea! Keep all of those ''refrigerator with a head'' like Roseanne, Oprah, and Rosie off of TV.
lol

[omded]

Honestly,
What on earth are some of you talking about? We have U.S. soldiers getting shot at in the Middle East, people starving in our own back yards, and a Federal and several State Governments who are spending way more money than they take in, and you people are concerned that a woman''s "private parts" got flashed on TV for less than a second?

So here we go again. Blame the "activist judges". Tell me I''ll be "the first one screaming bloody murder" if the FCC lets anything go on TV. Why don''t you just get rid of your TV sets and stop whining? If something offended me that much, that''s what I would do.

[txgrouch2006]

remrafdn wrote
Supermarine Spitfire, the North American P-51, and the SabreJet.
----------------
There you go! I want to see more of THOSE on TV!

[txgrouch2006]

omded wrote
What on earth are some of you talking about?
--------------
So, what are you saying? That we''re too STUPID to be able to think about more than one thing at a time? Or that we should be CENSORED if we try to think about something when YOU think we should be thinking about something "more important?"

Woo, woo! Here comes the Thought Police... LOL!

[nobdehom]

Who cares? Janet is a beautiful woman. God created her that way. I doubt anyone was really hurt by what happened. You people who can''''t accept God''''s art need to get a life and apologize to God for insulting his creation. As for me, I just give thanks for the beauty
I think she was created by the plastic surgeon BOZO don''t you know real from fake?

[bubbabear200]

What about some justice? Last year as I was watching Fox they showed a woman who must of been 5ft1 and 500 pounds wearing skin tight spandex. After seeing that I went blind for about a half hour. Who can I sue?