Justices to review Wardrobe Malfunction?

The US Supreme Court is now deliberating over whether the Federal Comm. Commission violated the pertinent statute when it fined broadcasters for the use of "fleeting expletives," especially in the contxt of awards shows, which by tradition are live broadcasts.

In the midst of this deliberation, the FCC last week threw visual imagery into the mix, asking that the high court review an appellate court’s decision to revoke its fine in connection with the "wardrobe malfunction" that exposed one of Janet Jackson's nipples during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show.

It was specifically the Third Circuit that threw out the $550,000 fine against CBS for airing Janet's breast ("Ms Jackson if you're nasty").

The Third Circuit said that the fine was based on an “arbitrary and capricious” change in policy. This was the same reasoning employed by the Secod Circuit in the Fox case over prohibited verbiage.

Accordingly, the FCC wants the issue of fleetingness -- for words and imagery –- disposed of by SCOTUS in one shot.

I think it is safe to presume that the FCC is making this argumnent because it has judged from the oral arguments in the Fox case that it has the votes at the SCOTUS level to re-assert its authority against the interference of these unruly appeals court judges.

I certainly hope that they are wrong in that judgment, and erroneous vote counting on the basis of oral arguments does occur.

I'll be hoping for the right decision, though bracing for the wrong, in the months to come, whether the two cases are combined or not.

The wardrobe malfunction

The FCC recently lost a high profile case. CBS got the fine rescinded on the so-shocking display of one of Janet Jackson's nipples.

"Miss Jackson if you're nasty."

So what? So ... nothing, really. It was all just a lot of sound and fury. Which is the only good reason for mentioning it now. How much of the sound and fury of today's discussion will soon likewise invoke the reflex yawns that this story probably does for most of us today?

From now on a wardrobe malfunction is to me just a plot development in a C.S. Lewis novel, nothing more.

Actually, that "wardrobe" functions unfailingly. I suppose, though, that if a child wanted to travel to Narnia, and upon walking through the wardrobe with that goal found himself in Oz ... THAT would be a wardrobe malfunction!