Ah, the difference in cultures...

[HarryKeogh]

How many times do Americans see nipples (female, that is) on TV?

Every night.

Oh, no, it wasn't just a "very vocal stink". A half-covered nipple resulted in:

• "Janet Jackson" being the most looked-for term in 2004 for many search engines
• MTV was banned from ever participating in an NFL half-time show again
• The FCC cracked down hard on subsequent shows, e.g. Howard Stern.
• Viacom was fined a total of $550,000 by the FCC.
• Viacom finally paid out no less than $3,5 million to settle complaints.
• Some networks imposed long periods of time delays.
• U.S. House of Represensative passed a bill enabling the FCC to fine not $27,500 per violation, but a whopping $500,000. This was lowered by the Senate to $275,000 per incident, with a maximum of $3 million a day.

It seems you've misunderstood me. I'm well aware of the fallout. It is my opinion that the vocal stink by a minority led to those outcomes.

 

[CFLarsen]

Every night.

Evidence?

It seems you've misunderstood me. I'm well aware of the fallout. It is my opinion that the vocal stink by a minority led to those outcomes.

Then you got a hell of a lot more to worry about than a half-covered nipple.

 

[Ziggurat]

Two problems with the comparison. First, many people believe (and I think they may be right) that the Janet Jackson episode was not accidental, but deliberate. And second, the problem with it wasn't just the nudity. He was ripping her clothes off. Even if the act had gone according to "plan" (and the underlayer had stayed on), that's essentially acting out sexual violence. Damned straight that's going to offend people, and I don't think there's anything puritanical about that.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Are we talking about this Angela Bismarchi ? (this is one of the very few forum-acceptable photos I could find).

/Aerosmith

Dude looks like a lady!

/

 

[HarryKeogh]

Evidence?



Then you got a hell of a lot more to worry about than a half-covered nipple.

-Check the programming lineup of HBO or Showtime or Cinemax. Read the question you asked me. Thank you.

-I'm not worried about half-covered nipples. I'm always concerned with fundamentalists and politicians in their pocket. Everyone should be.

 

[Skibum]

-Check the programming lineup of HBO or Showtime or Cinemax. Read the question you asked me. Thank you.

Nipples are also available on some regular cable channels as well.

I just want to throw out Mardi Gras as evidence that the U.S. is no more "prude" than Brazil.

 

[CFLarsen]

Two problems with the comparison. First, many people believe (and I think they may be right) that the Janet Jackson episode was not accidental, but deliberate.

Oh, come on. That wasn't the issue. The issue was that half-covered nipple being shown.

And second, the problem with it wasn't just the nudity. He was ripping her clothes off. Even if the act had gone according to "plan" (and the underlayer had stayed on), that's essentially acting out sexual violence. Damned straight that's going to offend people, and I don't think there's anything puritanical about that.

"Acting out sexual violence"? Are you serious? How about crime series, where women are (as an act) raped or sexually assaulted? Should that also be ruled out?

-Check the programming lineup of HBO or Showtime or Cinemax. Read the question you asked me. Thank you.

I don't have any of these channels. You show me.

-I'm not worried about half-covered nipples. I'm always concerned with fundamentalists and politicians in their pocket. Everyone should be.

Absolutely.

Nipples are also available on some regular cable channels as well.

Name the actual programs.

I just want to throw out Mardi Gras as evidence that the U.S. is no more "prude" than Brazil.

Clearly, you are wrong.

 

[HarryKeogh]

I don't have any of these channels. You show me.

You have heard of HBO right? You are aware they show unedited movies correct? Of course you have. So why the silly debating tactics of yours? Remember, exhausting your opponents (in this case by asking one to provide evidence for the mundane details) is a lousy way to win an argument.

Learn to argue your case properly. It will be so much more productive for you and more enjoyable and enlightening for everyone.

 

[Ziggurat]

"Acting out sexual violence"? Are you serious? How about crime series, where women are (as an act) raped or sexually assaulted? Should that also be ruled out?

Ruled out? No. But viewers of those shows know what they're getting. Viewers of the Superbowl thought they wouldn't be seeing anything like that. Parents who have no problem with any material existing on TV but who want to control what their children see were blindsided. Damned straight that will piss them off.

 

[CFLarsen]

You have heard of HBO right? You are aware they show unedited movies correct? Of course you have. So why the silly debating tactics of yours? Remember, exhausting your opponents (in this case by asking one to provide evidence for the mundane details) is a lousy way to win an argument.

Learn to argue your case properly. It will be so much more productive for you and more enjoyable and enlightening for everyone.

Yes, I have. But you can find anything on channels that you specifically buy, so you have already decided for yourself what you can anticipate.

Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?

 

[Ziggurat]

Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?

Is that question equivalent to your previous question? No, it isn't. A statement was made that Americans see female nipples every night on TV. You challenged that statement for some reason unknown to me, but that statement is true.

 

[HarryKeogh]

Is that question equivalent to your previous question? No, it isn't. A statement was made that Americans see female nipples every night on TV. You challenged that statement for some reason unknown to me, but that statement is true.

Thanks Ziggurat.

Stop moving the goalposts, Claus. Do you want to have an intellectually honest debate or what?

 

[elgarak]

Frankly, this thread is useless without links to some pics

PBS stations quite often showed in the past frontal nudity in a non-sexual context (say, an art model in an European produced TV series). Dependent on your locality, though (censoring was done by the local TV station). However, in the current political climate such instances are very rare.

 

[CFLarsen]

Is that question equivalent to your previous question? No, it isn't. A statement was made that Americans see female nipples every night on TV. You challenged that statement for some reason unknown to me, but that statement is true.

Thanks Ziggurat.

Stop moving the goalposts, Claus. Do you want to have an intellectually honest debate or what?

I am not moving any goalposts. The carnival in Rio is shown on national TV, on the non-paid-for channels. It's comparatively as big - probably bigger - than the Superbowl. We are comparing TV coverage of the two events.

Look, it's a perfectly simple question: Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?

I'll venture an informed guess: They're not. If I'm wrong, tell me.

Quite a difference in attitude wrt nudity, hm?

Come now. No need to be prudish.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Eh, while she might be better looking than JJ, Angela looksa bit too much like a drag queen for my taste.

I don't know if it is a bad picture, but Terry's legs are sexier, at least from his picture here.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The question is: How do you square that with Nipplegate?

That is because certain segments of the religious right in America have decided that complaints over broadcast media are a very effective tool to enforce their agenda.

I believe one singlehandedly increased by several fold the number of FCC complaints filed on an annual basis

 

[ponderingturtle]

Nipples are also available on some regular cable channels as well.

Hey lets not forget National Geographic and various PBS sociological studies. And she was black, isn't that one of the prerequisites to get bare breasted women on TV with out comment?

 

[HarryKeogh]

I am not moving any goalposts. The carnival in Rio is shown on national TV, on the non-paid-for channels. It's comparatively as big - probably bigger - than the Superbowl. We are comparing TV coverage of the two events.

Look, it's a perfectly simple question: Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?

I'll venture an informed guess: They're not. If I'm wrong, tell me.

Come now. No need to be prudish.

of course you moved the goalposts...first you asked this "How many times do Americans see nipples (female, that is) on TV?". When you didn't get the answer you wanted you asked this "Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?"

As to your new question, "Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?" the answer is it depends on the time. The FCC has something called "safe harbor". If you're interested in learning more about it feel free to google.

So you're wrong and I'm telling you.

Quite a difference in attitude wrt nudity, hm?

Sure. I agreed with you way back in post #16.

 

[Darth Rotor]

The question is: How do you square that with Nipplegate?

I thought the reaction to it was an over reaction, and all in all a load of bollocks. JJ was playing the attention whore, as she had correctly discovered over the previous three years that "the only thing worse than being talked about was not being talked about." She became talked about again, so she achieved her important marketing goal.

The network and the NFL, who paid the performers, could have perhaps sued over non performance, or failure in performance, based on whatever contractrual language Ms Jackson agreed to (through her agents) in providing entertainment. The FCC getting involved was, IMO, a waste of govermemt manhours.

I generally don't watch Super Bowl half time acts. The acts are usually not in synch with football. I typically use the half time to take care of mundane chores related to the food and beverage concern, or take a walk, toss the football with the kids who are over, or get up and stretch.

I don't tune in the Super Bowl for anything other than football.

If they got rid of those idiotic half time acts, I'd be pleased, but I suspect the whole thing is tied to advertising money and ratings tactics.

DR

 

[CFLarsen]

of course you moved the goalposts...first you asked this "How many times do Americans see nipples (female, that is) on TV?". When you didn't get the answer you wanted you asked this "Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?"

As to your new question, "Are female nipples allowed on CBS, NBC or ABC?" the answer is it depends on the time. The FCC has something called "safe harbor". If you're interested in learning more about it feel free to google.

So you're wrong and I'm telling you.>

A Google search does not constitute evidence.

You would never accept such a response from me. So why should I accept it from you?

I thought the reaction to it was an over reaction, and all in all a load of bollocks. JJ was playing the attention whore, as she had correctly discovered over the previous three years that "the only thing worse than being talked about was not being talked about." She became talked about again, so she achieved her important marketing goal.

Personally, I think that it was planned. Why on Earth would you use this nipple-thingie, if her nipple was going to be covered by a bra anyway? Who wears these thingies under the bra?

Nevertheless, the issue is, as you say, the over-reaction. Be it a deliberate action or not, it was a half-covered nipple, for crying out loud! It's just...a nipple! It's virtually the first thing we all see after being born.

The network and the NFL, who paid the performers, could have perhaps sued over non performance, or failure in performance, based on whatever contractrual language Ms Jackson agreed to (through her agents) in providing entertainment. The FCC getting involved was, IMO, a waste of govermemt manhours.

Oh, no. The issue is not the FCC getting involved. The issue is that there even exists such rules. That's a political decision.

NippleGate vs. TapasexoGate.