The most expensive peepshow in history

Johno Johno

In a stunning display of unmitigated fuckwittery, the FCC has fined VIACOM more than half a million smackeroos for the Great Janet Nipple Event of 2004.

That's right. In a superbowl that featured dozens of nearly naked cheerleaders filmed at close range, countless swimsuits in commercials, and an astonishingly unfunny ad whose punchline was a farting horse, the possibly accidental and entirely unprurient exposure of one nipple is WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!, so wrong in fact that the network in question has to pay a gigantic fine. Worse yet, two members of the FCC's Star Chamber thought the fine was far too lenient considering the millions of tots now hellbound.

Where's the fine for the farting horse? That's the shit I don't want my kids seeing.

[wik] In fact, I didn't even know it was possible to make a farting horse unfunny. That takes a notorious lack of talent.

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 5

§ 5 Comments

1

Greg, I won't hold that against you so long as you were half in the bag at the time. I don't know why I thought the horse was so unfunny, but it actually left me nonplussed, pissed off and perplexed that the 'mercial was that awful.

Diff'rent strokes and all that.

Speaking of strokes, why not fine NBC for the hours and hours of women's beack volleyball we all saw? Six inches of Spandex does not clothing make.

Johno Johno

3

Speaking of exposing nipples...did anyone catch the Sox game a couple of weeks ago where a girl made her way to the front row behind the plate and flashed her breast to, oh, a few million viewers? In fact, she did it twice. What perplexes me is that my husband didn't even see it because he was focusing too much on the scene being played in the forefront.

So my question is, does the FCC get to fine her?

Ming-Syu Ming-Syu

4

My kid sees a nipple every time he wants a snack. Somebody sue me.

(Sorry, was that too much information?)

Mrs. Buckethead Mrs. Buckethead

[ You're too late, comments are closed ]