Create Account

Username
Password
Remember me
Email
 
4
Vormid
Vormid

Bare ass okay on TV

19 comments, 1116 views, posted 8:35 pm 05/01/2011 in News by Vormid
Vormid has 5965 posts, 505 threads, 0 points
"You can't simultaneously fire teachers and Tomahawk missiles."

NEW YORK (AP) — The Federal Communications Commission cannot fine broadcasters for showing a woman's nude buttocks on a 2003 episode of "NYPD Blue," a federal court ruled Tuesday, citing its earlier decision to strike down FCC rules regarding fleeting expletives uttered on live broadcasts as unconstitutionally vague.

The 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan decided Tuesday to nullify a $27,500 penalty that the FCC imposed on ABC and 45 of its affiliate stations after the image was broadcast on the police drama for less than seven seconds in February 2003. The combined fine was greater than $1.2 million.

The appeals court said its finding was consistent with its decision last year that TV stations can no longer be fined for fleeting, unscripted profanities uttered during live broadcasts.

The FCC had created its fleeting-expletive policy after a January 2003 NBC broadcast of the Golden Globe Awards in which U2 lead singer Bono uttered the phrase "f------ brilliant." The FCC said that word in any context "inherently has a sexual connotation" and can lead to enforcement.

Fox Television Stations, owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., and other networks challenged the policy in 2006 after the FCC cited the use of profanity during awards programs that were aired in 2002 and 2003. The FCC has appealed that ruling.

In its Tuesday ruling, a three-judge 2nd Circuit panel wrote that there was "no significant distinction" between its decision in the expletives case and its findings in the "NYPD Blue" case.

"According to the FCC, 'nudity itself is not per se indecent,'" the judges wrote. "The FCC, therefore, decides in which contexts nudity is permissible and in which contexts it is not pursuant to an indecency policy that a panel of this court has determined is unconstitutionally vague."

In a statement, FCC lawyer Austin Schlick said the ruling confirms that the 2nd Circuit's decision in the earlier case was "excessively broad in rejecting the FCC's ability to use context to evaluate indecency cases." The FCC said it has not yet decided whether to appeal.

"Children and families are the real victims today. This ruling will only serve to embolden the networks to air even more graphic material," said Tim Winter, president of The Parents Television Council, a group that supports strong broadcast-indecency rules and which filed papers with the court before it ruled.

"In this instance, ABC intentionally chose to air a scripted visual depiction of a fully naked woman before 10 p.m. There was absolutely nothing fleeting or accidental about it," Winter said in a statement. "The inclusion of the lengthy and ogling scene was intended to pander and titillate. This was a clear breach of the decency law. And now, nearly eight years after the episode aired, ABC is told it doesn't have to abide by the law."

David Kushner, a Raleigh, N.C., lawyer who represented ABC affiliates in the case, said the decision was a "nice New Year's present" for the stations but not the end of the litigation.

"This case is far from over. I would be surprised if the FCC does not seek rehearing," he said.

He predicted the decision would not lead to more nudity on network television, just as the decision in the fleeting expletives case has not created an avalanche of controversies over profanities on network television.

"No broadcasters are anxious to go out there and step their foot close to the line," Kushner said.

He noted that the "NYPD Blue" episode led to fines only for stations in the Central and Mountain time zones because the show was aired on the East Coast at 10 p.m., when the rules are more relaxed, rather than 9 p.m., when it aired elsewhere.

In the "NYPD Blue" episode, actress Charlotte Ross, playing character Connie McDowell, disrobes as she prepares to shower after she had recently moved in with Andy Sipowicz, another character on the show. After her buttocks and the side of one of her breasts are briefly shown, the camera pans down and reveals her nude buttocks while she faces the shower.

Then Sipowicz's young son enters the bathroom and sees McDowell naked from the front, though the son blocks the audience's view of McDowell's nudity, according to a description of the scene in the court record. Each character reacts with embarrassment. The child apologizes, and McDowell, covering her private areas, responds, "It's OK. No problem."

The court said ABC said the scene was included to portray the awkwardness between a child and his parent's new romantic partner and their difficulties in adjusting to life together.

The FCC imposed its most severe fine after receiving indecency complaints following the broadcast.

link

Comments

4
8:48 pm 05/01/2011

griffin

Quote by Vormid:
This ruling will only serve to embolden the networks to air even more graphic material," said Tim Winter, president of The Parents Television Council


Awesome. More titties on TV!

The Parents Television Council needs a big fat dose of wake the fuck up you assholes. Check out what they think of primetime TV here. I would be very hesitant to let me kid watch that stuff, not because it may be considered prurient or obscene, but because it is fucking moronic imo.

People's view of sexually themed material is changing. And I don't think it will be acceptable to pander to the sexual morality of what is fast becoming a minority on broadcast TV for much longer. I think we will see some major changes in the next few years.

3
8:54 pm 05/01/2011

Flee

Take a page from Canadian broadcasting... As long as they "warn" viewers about what they will see/hear, they can essentially play anything.

1
9:20 pm 05/01/2011

griffin

Quote by Flee:
Take a page from Canadian broadcasting... As long as they "warn" viewers about what they will see/hear, they can essentially play anything.


I remember seeing Heartbreak Ridge on TV, which featured Clint Eastwood talking about 'clusterflops'. It struck me as bizarre that you could show extreme violence, but not permit the characters to say 'fuck'. As fatso said in 'Apocalypse Now', it's obscene.

1
9:23 pm 05/01/2011

Flee

Yeah, it used to be like that. Now the f-bomb is a fairly common thing to hear. Even seen a BJ on our TV. of course that is an "artsy" channel, but its still basic cable. and the french channels that show softcore porn nightly.

0
9:27 pm 05/01/2011

PiratePoet

So why did Fox/News Corp cut out Bart's penis and the dialog "bountiful penis" from the airing of the Simpson's movie?

1
9:30 pm 05/01/2011

Flee

It should also be noted that there has been many ass shots on NYPD Blue. Do you think anyone watched it for the acting? The show should have been cancelled and fined $1,000,000,000,000,000,000.00 when they aired Sipowicz's ass.

1
9:32 pm 05/01/2011

Flee

Although I watched the scene in question and it is a bit much for regular TV. all that was missing was some "lips". I bet it wouldnt stay on the front page if posted here.

1
9:37 pm 05/01/2011

Quaektem

Quote by Flee:
Take a page from Canadian broadcasting... As long as they "warn" viewers about what they will see/hear, they can essentially play anything.

I would be happy with that. Add to that the ability of most TV's being produced to filter out broadcasts based on the rating system and the FCC should take a collective leap off a very tall cliff.

1
9:40 pm 05/01/2011

Flee

The warnings are the best... when you hear "the following contains nudity, sexuality, violence and coarse language", you're fairly certain it will be worth watching

1
10:10 pm 05/01/2011

Quaektem

yup

1
10:27 pm 05/01/2011

blackspy

Quote by Flee:
Yeah, it used to be like that. Now the f-bomb is a fairly common thing to hear. Even seen a BJ on our TV. of course that is an "artsy" channel, but its still basic cable. and the french channels that show softcore porn nightly.

Ah Blue Nuit ...

1
12:28 pm 06/01/2011

Vormid

Well as a parent I know that with most TV and or cable services you can restrict shows by their rating. It is annoying to have to enter a code when I want to watch anything over Y11 or TV14, but it keeps my kids from accidentally watching something I don't want them to. I have the control.

0
1:06 pm 06/01/2011

Flee

Id be more worried about childrens programming to be honest. if i have kids everything but the weather channel would be locked out.

0
1:36 pm 06/01/2011

Vormid

Quote by Flee:
Id be more worried about childrens programming to be honest. if i have kids everything but the weather channel would be locked out.

hahahahaaa....just wait.

1
1:51 pm 06/01/2011

backroom

Quote by Flee:
Id be more worried about childrens programming to be honest. if i have kids everything but the weather channel would be locked out.


Pssst....
It does not work that way. Two dudes can't have kids.

1
1:57 pm 06/01/2011

aion_z

Charlotte Ross... Yeah, baby!

0
1:59 pm 06/01/2011

aion_z

So if its okay on TV, is it now okay on our front page?

1
2:00 pm 06/01/2011

aion_z


The scene in question.
http://www.hypoint.com/Web2Night/012808/012808CharlotteRossShower.jpg
(Deliberately did not add image tags.)

0
2:02 pm 06/01/2011

aion_z

Here's the other one. http://www.perfectpeople.net/photo-picture-image-media/Charlotte-Ross-640x480-38kb-media-3833-media-121260-1189108474.jpg

Add Comment

Log in via teoti, or register to add a comment!


Teh NookMayrHayasdanJaranWebAngryShirtsGoneGeekEat Liver