JWL.Freakwitch.net

morality in the media

The original title of this post was "Breast SuperBowl Ever." But that post was swallowed by my own incompetence in running my computer. Brain fart, post gone. Buh-bye.

But anyway, I was reading an article on Common Dreams that pointed out an apparent contradiction in CBS's conception of "morality" and/or "public interest."

First, one must accept that Janet Jackson showing her tit at the SuperBowl halftime show (with help from Justin Timberlake) was planned. There is simply too much evidence for it not to be (JJ's pasty, lights going out immediately, video cutting away immediately). CBS -- or at least someone at CBS -- knew exactly what was going to happen and approved it.

Contrast this with CBS's decision to censor MoveOn.org's ad criticizing Bush. CBS is willing to show a tit, but not an ad criticizing Bush. Ummm, OK.

Now don't get me wrong; in a perfect world, there would be plenty of tits (male and female, in all shapes and sizes) shown on TV, just as there would be plenty of ads criticizing whoever is in power. It just seems strange to me that the female form is considered "offensive" in the knee-jerk reaction to the hubbub.

But note that very few people are talking about the moveon.org/bushin30seconds ads now. We've all been distracted by Janet's tit.

UPDATE: I just saw where Michael Powell, chairman of the FCC, had this to say:

"I am outraged at what I saw during the halftime show of the Super Bowl. Like millions of Americans, my family and I gathered around the television for a celebration. Instead, that celebration was tainted by a classless, crass and deplorable stunt. Our nation's children, parents and citizens deserve better."

Yes, our children do deserve better. Like being able to see what their economic future will look like, if our current economic policies continue. The rhetoric around this event grows more and more interesting.

posted by JWL at 11:49 PM |