Actually, I was listening to a talk show this morning and a reporter affiliated with the show was at the exit where the police brought the guy. They had hog-tied him (yes, still naked) and dropped him, "unit" first, onto the concrete floor.
Now, there might be a "difference" between full nudity vs. partial nudity, but it is still nudity. And while I don't have any problem or hang ups about nudity, it is totally bogus to give it a complete pass.
It was wrong for CBS to allow this to go out over the airways. They knew it before time and they let it go without a warning to parents that there may be some parts not appropriate for children.
Interestingly, if they HAD to have given that warning, it would have NECESSSARILY caused a few things to happen. 1) People would have tuned out just in case, 2) the people at CBS might (I stress MIGHT) have thought, "You know, why do we have to give a warning to a show that is broadcast to families?" (which, on second thought and as pointed out, was the precise reason CBS allowed this: to further devalue family values), or 3) it would have given them an "out", even though it would just have been a pathetic excuse.
Come to think of it, that's what CBS is: a pathetic excuse.
From what the papers are reporting today, the streaker was wearing a g-string and shoes. But as I've posted in another thread, CBS' real problem with the streaker is that he had a gambling website written on his body. Obviously, nudity is no problem for CBS, but somebody trying to get free advertising is!
It was wrong for CBS to allow this to go out over the airways. They knew it before time and they let it go without a warning to parents that there may be some parts not appropriate for children.
You raise some good points. The thing is, if they're asked why they didn't have a parental warning on, CBS would say that they didn't know what was going to happen, which, as you know, is total Barbra Streisand. All these "events" are orchestrated down to the second.