The final word from guest writer Ian Nicoll.
Now the FCC won’t let me be or let me be me, so let me see…
Nips of mass destruction?
I happened to be out of the country for Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” during the Super Bowl. In Spain the reaction was…hehe sweet, we got to see Janet’s boob! From what I could tell in the British papers, their reaction was something a little more reserved, “By George! I do say that appears to be a nipple! harumph!” Unbeknownest to me America was having a conniption fit of puritanical proportions, “NIPPLES!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOO, the children might see!
They’ll forget who God is, become atheists or worse (MUSLIMS), start believing in evolution, stop supporting our President, troops, country, move to Syria, don towels on their heads and carry out a jihad of epic proportions against the Nipple Baring Heathens. To prevent this, the House overwhelmingly approved a bill to move the maximum fine the FCC can impose on a radio or television station for a single “offense” from $27,500, to $500,000 (USAToday 3/18/2004).
Take a second to sit back and digest that staggering figure. It is an increase of $472,500. Clear Channel dropped Howard Stern from their programming in six major markets around the U.S. to avoid such fines. The scary part about all this is…besides the obvious first amendment violations…is that there are no clearly defined rules for what the FCC deems unacceptable on the airwaves.
Michael Harrison, publisher of Talk Magazine, puts it succinctly,”(This is) so chilling (because the rules are) so vague that it leaves it up to the politicians to determine who to go after – and that is scary”. It’s sad when at twenty two years of age I can long for the “good ol’ days” when people could just turn off the radio or switch the station if they didn’t want to listen to a show.
What ever happened to forcing something off the air by not watching/listening to it? If enough people stop tuning in advertisers will withdraw their money and the station will be forced to drop the show! Why must we have any government, Republican or Democrat, regulating what we may or may not watch/hear/see/listen to? It’s bullshit, plain and simple. Hello? America? We’re kind of at WAR here.
The world is NOT a safer place than it was before we invaded Iraq, as apparently a majority of us think it is according to some poll whose name eludes me at the moment. Madrid anyone? Muslim terrorists didn’t bomb the Atocha station because Spain eats a lot of pork. They bombed it because Spain has troops in Iraq. But that’s not what Bush Inc. tells middle America. Mission Accomplished! Everything’s going great, they’ve signed a interim constitution! That’s practically one step away from Starbucks serving crude flavored java on every street corner from Bhagdad to Tikrit! My point is this, we have bigger problems than Howard Stern and Janet’s right tit.
If we’re going to fine obscenities on radio why don’t we go after Neal Boortz, who I recently heard say, “We don’t have an unemployment problem in this country, people are unemployed because they WANT to be unemployed”. Or perhaps we should slap a 500 grand penalty on Sean Hannity (You’re listening to the Hannitization of America! Sweeping the country with a new patriotic fervor!). Just recently he was talking about the Madrid bombings.
He said that Spain’s premier elect, Zapatero, is appeasing the terrorists by following up on his long standing campaign promise to withdrawal Spanish troops from Iraq unless the UN passes a resolution supporting their presence. Zapatero isn’t appeasing anyone besides his electorate, 90 percent of which opposed going into Iraq in the first place. Hannity says that this appeases the terrorists. He also says that Al Qaeda wants George W. out of office. He says that John Kerry is the choice of the terrorists.
My question is this: Why the hell would Al-Qaeda want the greatest recruiting tool they have, George W. Bush and his nifty doctrine of preemption, out of office? Why would they want John Kerry to rebuild America’s international alliances and begin to mend world opinion of America? They don’t. Bush in office is a greater asset to the spread of international terrorism than Al Qaeda had ever dreamed of.
But that’s not the point.
Sean Hannity says that John Kerry is the candidate the terrorists want us to elect. So he says we have an OBLIGATION to vote for Bush so we don’t appease the terrorists. I’m sorry Sean, but I thought (and maybe this is just me) that appeasing the terrorists meant letting them dictate what we do in our daily lives. I thought appeasing terrorism meant letting them tell us how to run our country.
Appeasing terrorism means sacrificing our civil liberties by voting Bush and the Patriot Act back into office. Appeasing terrorism means voting for a candidate who will further erode relationships with our allies abroad and weaken our economy at home. It means voting a president back into office so he can have a second go around at ruining America and doing their work for them.
That IS the point. I don’t know how I got from Janet Jackson’s breast to George Dubya, but it worked and that alone is a telling commentary on how the whole shebang is going pear shaped.
Bah, fu*k it. Why don’t we just give in and simply have state run airwaves pumping us full of conservative propaganda (Limbaugh, Boortz, Hannity). Maybe just humor us and give us three stations so we can have the illusion of choice (Clear Channel, Cox, Viacom). Do what Sean Hannity tells you, he’s a patriot. And for the love all that is good and sacred, keep your nipples in your shirt… there might be adults watching.
Ian Nicoll graduated from the University of Mary Washington with a degree in International Affairs. He currently lives and works in Spain. His interests include i-pods, Arsenal Football Club and beer.
Click here for Ian Nicoll blog and contact..