Did Fox broadcast nudity in 2003

That’s what the Parents Television Council is claiming, and the episode of “Married by America” in question did draw a hefty FCC fine amounting to $91K. However, Fox has fought the levy, arguing that there was no objectionable language, and that what might be construed as objectionable imagery was obscured. “Fox’s arguments have no basis in reality,” said PTC President Tim Winter. “This ‘Married by America’ episode featured whipped cream being licked off of nude strippers on prime time broadcast television – which clearly crossed the line of decency.  If Fox executives exposed that same content to their own employees, they would be sued for sexual harassment. Yet they are pumping that very same material into homes when millions of children are in the viewing audience.”

RBR/TVBR observation: Tasteless, yes. Nudity? Well, no. Implied nudity or obscured nudity is not nudity. It’s like when the old Victoria’s Secret fashion shows used to incite howls of protest. We would point out that most underwear garments are no more revealing than what you can see daily, in public, at any beach or pool in America. If implication can be justification for a fine, let’s nail “I Love Lucy” – it doesn’t take a genius to figure out the implications of Little Ricky’s sudden appearance. You know what? At the outset of this observation we noted that “Married by America” was tasteless. The American public agreed. Using that most excellent voting tool, the remote channel control, the cast their nay votes and sent the program to a swift and richly deserved early demise. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what freedom is all about. Have an opinion on this article? Post your comment below.

Tweet