In case you missed it...

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Yes, they're STILL mulling over Janet Jackson's breast

Still struggling after all these years on the issue of indecency on television, the U.S. Supreme Court just returned the lawsuit against CBS Television to the lower court, regarding Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" during the Superbowl a couple of years ago back. This is part of the United States' never-ending effort to prove to the rest of earth how utterly uptight we are.

In a related local story, News8Austin found themselves in a similar situation recently, when Mayoral candidate Carole Keeton-McClellan-Rylander-Strayhorn had a wardrobe malfunction during a campaign appearance.



Posted by Harold Cook at 12:03 PM
Labels:

1 comments:

Faith Kinyanjui May 8, 2009 9:46 AM  

I believe its important to realize that the media has a responsibility to the general public. There responsibility holds to the fact that the contents covered or in this case uncovered reflect to the companies social responsibility. So instead of complaining about this issue being ongoing, the better question is, is this company holding to its social responsibility? If so, even witht he long court systems, are they doing it for show or is the indecency trully a matter of concern?

Post a Comment

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Yes, they're STILL mulling over Janet Jackson's breast

Still struggling after all these years on the issue of indecency on television, the U.S. Supreme Court just returned the lawsuit against CBS Television to the lower court, regarding Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" during the Superbowl a couple of years ago back. This is part of the United States' never-ending effort to prove to the rest of earth how utterly uptight we are.

In a related local story, News8Austin found themselves in a similar situation recently, when Mayoral candidate Carole Keeton-McClellan-Rylander-Strayhorn had a wardrobe malfunction during a campaign appearance.



Posted by Harold Cook at 12:03 PM
Labels:

1 comments so far:

Faith Kinyanjui May 8, 2009 9:46 AM  

I believe its important to realize that the media has a responsibility to the general public. There responsibility holds to the fact that the contents covered or in this case uncovered reflect to the companies social responsibility. So instead of complaining about this issue being ongoing, the better question is, is this company holding to its social responsibility? If so, even witht he long court systems, are they doing it for show or is the indecency trully a matter of concern?

Post a Comment

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

© 2008-2012 Harold Cook. All rights reserved. No content may be reproduced without prior written permission. Views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of clients, employers, or other sane human beings. This offer is void where prohibited. Substantial penalty for early withdrawal. Political satire contained herein is subject to change without notice. Your mileage may vary. All models are over the age of 18. Keep away from open flames. No animals were harmed in the making of this website. If this website is ingested, do not induce vomiting; if symptoms persist, consult your physician. If content of this website offends you, by all means extract the corncob from your ass and lighten up. Comment on this.



Log In/Out



Blogger Template Spain courtesy of Ourblogtemplates.com. Header artwork courtesy of Doug Zabel.

Back to TOP