What a shame you couldn't keep your own potty mouth clean while doing your best to strike that all-important blow for the nanny state.
If the public is outraged by the Janet Jackson incident and other examples of potential indecency broadcast on public airwaves, then fines would certainly be upheld in a court of law. And then some. Whether or not a sufficient percentage of viewers are in fact as outraged as you are is an open question, but I certainly have no problem with that outrage. In spite of what outfits like the AFA say about programming that stand out as wild distortions, which is certainly the case here.
For this particular program, I have no problem believing that the percentage of viewers holding any outrage at the broadcast of the this extremely pertinent documentary footage--unedited, unsanitized, uncensored--would be absurdly small. And that if the matter were to see a court of law, that it would be laughed out of court. You are free to disagree.
If, as is claimed, CBS views this as a wedge to simply program as much profanity as possible in the future, then the percentage of viewers sufficiently outraged should serve as insurance that the network would be appropriately sanctioned.
Of course, if most of the people complaining about programming are actually a small number generating multiple complaints under false pretenses, as has long been alleged, that would change things considerably, now, wouldn't it.
What the AFA says about this program is absolutely outrageous, and I seriously doubt that it could possibly fit any reasonable--or even a nanny state--definition of indecent, and certainly not obscene.
I don't see why it is that conservatives wish to appear to be so unbelievably short-sighted and foolish over such a ridiculous issue. Especially given the subject matter. Viewing the profanity in this program as gratuitous is a very odd way of looking at things. And if CBS deserves to be fined, I can't see why it should be over this program.
Methinks it's much more than "hell" that is going to get aired.
And they'll get a big chunk of those whose thirst for the curses is currently satisfied by cable.
You know, when I first saw the length of your reply, I thought it might be worth reading. But after I read your first sentence, I figured the rest of your reply was going to be worthless too. Turns out I was right.