Fox NFL coverage showed too much

[Bob S.]

During the Fix post-game show between the Vikes and Lions, there were the typical locker room interviews. In this case, however, everyone who prescreened the film (assuming they did so) seemed to have missed the Viking TE [/URL]Visanthe Shinacoe as he was dressing (or undressing) with only a small, inadequate towel covering himself. It briefly came off, exposing himself to the camera.

See the story [URL=http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2008/12/08/fox-sorry-for-visanthe-shiancoe-penis-shot-nfl-plans-no-changes/?icid=100214839x1214395529x1200953437]here (http://nfl.fanhouse.com/tag/VisantheShiancoe/).

Bob S.

[simonsebs]

I wonder how many complaints this is going to get from the Parents Television Council and if Fox will get fined for this. Then again this may turn not to be that big a deal. I'm sure there were worst things on that day, like watching the Lions play :laugh:.

[walter05]

Maybe Fox should protect sensibilities.

They should hire experts to review the films or tapes.

Some experts would focus on butt cracks and be known for spotting them exposed.

Others would be scrotum experts to make sure nothing there is exposed.

Others would be penis experts to make sure nothing there is exposed.

I think few noticed it. If they did, it is normal for males to be nude in a locker room. As long as the camera did not zoom in or call attention to it, few will care.

[Agde]

I was just pondering the potential beneficial public impact (from a naturist standpoint) of having routine television coverage of normal locker room scenes after NFL games, nudity and all -- body types ranging from skinny defensive backs to fat linemen, men and women reporters wandering around doing interviews with players about the game. Kind of a weekly antidote to Janet Jackson half-time silliness. I mean, how could the Parents Television Council claim anything untoward was going on in such an atmosphere of all-American sweat socks, bruised bones, and battle mud? BTW, just curious -- do they have individual shower stalls in NFL locker rooms?

[nakedstudent]

I hope FOX doesn't get fined for this. In this case, exposure was definitely not intentional and the camera man and interviewer were obviously covering the game in a way that has been acceptable traditionally.

This is totally different contextually from other issues we've discussed in this section.

[Illinois59]

I hope FOX doesn't get fined for this. In this case, exposure was definitely not intentional and the camera man and interviewer were obviously covering the game in a way that has been acceptable traditionally.

This is totally different contextually from other issues we've discussed in this section.

Actually, Fox should be fined. Seems logical to me that it is reasonable to expect nudity in the locker room of a sports team after a game. You know, showers, changing clothes. CBS should not have been fined as the Super Bowl halftime show has not traditionally contained nudity, or "wardrobe malfunctions". Why complain about nude people at a nudist resort or people with guns at a gun show?

[walter05]

I could not object more.

I am sure that there are rules and procedures, but people are human.

It is not common for performers to show breasts in a Super Bowl halftime.

However, athletes commonly get naked in locker rooms.

As long as there was no zooming in on it, and it was in the background, I am sure it was an accident. No fine should be expected.

[walter05]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLoxb5yewd0 is a link that shows what happened. It is the only time I saw it.

One would really have to look to see anything besides pubic hair.

I think it is a lot of fuss about nothing.

[Illinois59]

I could not object more.

I am sure that there are rules and procedures, but people are human.

It is not common for performers to show breasts in a Super Bowl halftime.

However, athletes commonly get naked in locker rooms.

As long as there was no zooming in on it, and it was in the background, I am sure it was an accident. No fine should be expected.


Thanks for agreeing with me. It is correct that it is not common for performers to show breasts during a Super Bowl half time show and it is common for athletes to be naked in a locker room. I'm sure that CBS has rules about nudity in broadcasts and it is also true that people are human. Simply put, if a network decides to have interviews with sports personalities in a locker room after a game, the chances of having someone who is not "properly" attired accidently moving into the view of the camera is quite likely to happen at some point in time and the network accepts that risk. A performer such as Janet Jackson should know the rules of conduct for a television appearance and such a display of nudity is obviously not in compliance with those rules. If CBS had advance knowledge of her plan, I'm sure she would not have been on the show. Fox willingly takes the risk of the locker room interviews. CBS got stuck with a Janet Jackson publicity stunt that I'm sure was not cleared in advance by CBS.

[nakedstudent]

Actually, Fox should be fined. Seems logical to me that it is reasonable to expect nudity in the locker room of a sports team after a game. You know, showers, changing clothes. CBS should not have been fined as the Super Bowl halftime show has not traditionally contained nudity, or "wardrobe malfunctions". Why complain about nude people at a nudist resort or people with guns at a gun show?

***Exactly what is wrong with the nudist image right now***


JJ and Timberlake could have been having bondage sex and it probably wouldn't have made any difference to you...

All this work we do and claims of "Nudity isn't about sex." and you still get it bass ackwards.

[walter05]

Illinois59;

I was being sarcastic. I don't expect the networks to hire people to focus on butt cracks, scrotums, and penises.

I think Fox should not be fined.

Perhaps the football player should be admonished.

Walter

[nudepartime]

Imagine a nude person in a shower/locker room, do we expect to see everyone in their suits and ties, underwear, bathing suits or nude? I would say nude and would hope that we are prepared for that. I believe most of the world showers nude and I think it should not surprise us that a person happened to be naked in a shower/locker room. It is a positive thing for nudist not a negative, a person was shown innocently, in a breif camera shot and he was naked in the shower room, like we all would be! Oh well things happen, no one was hurt and I can't see where any harm was done. I say no fine for FOX.

[Illinois59]

The fact is that I could really care less about the Janet Jackson caper or the locker room incident. Think about what I said. CBS got fined for what Janet Jackson did on stage during the Super Bowl half time show because a vocal minority started a campaign of complaints to the FCC. I really doubt that CBS knew in advance what she was going to do and CBS did react quickly to minimize the impact once the "wardrobe malfunction" occurred. Why should CBS get a hefty fine for the actions of Janet Jackson when CBS played an unwilling part in what happened? If you believe in personal responsibility, it was Janet Jackson pulling off, pardon the expression, the publicity stunt so why not hold her accountable? Likewise, in reality, Fox should not be fined since what happened was not planned by the participants and was not done with the previous approval of the network.
But then again, if CBS can be fined, so can Fox. Why not treat CBS and Fox equally instead of bowing down to a group of fanatics who probably didn't see the Super Bowl half time show anyway.

[richinoregon]

The reason CBS got fined and not one is considering it against FOX is that FOX isn't broadcast over the airwaves; it's cable. The FCC has no authority over cable. If it did the vocal minority would have shut down HBO years ago. FOX could broadcast the locker room as-is nudity and all and the FCC could do nothing.

[Illinois59]

The reason CBS got fined and not one is considering it against FOX is that FOX isn't broadcast over the airwaves; it's cable. The FCC has no authority over cable. If it did the vocal minority would have shut down HBO years ago. FOX could broadcast the locker room as-is nudity and all and the FCC could do nothing.


Thanks for clearing up that important difference. I am surprised that the vocal minority hasn't found a way yet to dictate what is shown on cable and satellite tv.

[Pete Knight]

This illustrates the difference between UK and USA, we had a similar incident here on the Independent TV (ITV) channel, the dressing (locker) room incident (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/facup/3536914/ITV-make-second-apology-after-Histon-player-is-seen-naked-on-live-TV-Football.html) happened not once, but twice, there was no hint of a fine or mass outcry, the TV station simply said oops, sorry!

Our regulatory bodies were re-organised to encompass the new media, we have merged the telecommunications and broadcast authorities with one body, Ofcom (http://www.ofcom.org.uk/) covers all communications media, cable, terestial transmitted, satelite transmitted and telephony.

Newspaper issues remain as a seperate industry regulated body.

Pete Knight

[walter05]

First of all, Fox does indeed broadcast over the air waves.

Second of all, the FCC does have regulatory authority over cable. However, because one chooses whether to have cable or what stations, the rules are more relaxed.

None the less, when HBO is going to show something of an adult nature, there are warnings. This is partly due to regulatory concerns.

In the Janet Jackson case, I also agree that CBS should not have been fined. If any one should have been, it was Justin Timberlake who exposed Janet Jackon's breast. She should only have been fined if she agreed and it was not by accident. In order to fine her or CBS, there should be an indication that they knew it was going to happen and agreed or did not stop it.

Walter

[Bob S.]

rich: "The reason CBS got fined and not one is considering it against FOX is that FOX isn't broadcast over the airwaves"

As walt mentioned rich, Fox is an over-the-air broadcast station. ABC, NBC, CBS Fox, MY TV, CW, and PBS all are open to FCC regulations. I can also get HSN with just an antenna, but I am not sure about that one. Of course, PBS is allowed much more nudity, especially if it is primitive nudity, than the other networks.

It will be interesting to see whether the FCC annoiunces any complaints of the interview. Even if they do, I would highly doubt that they would consider fining Fox for the incidental brief background nudity. That is one big difference between the JJ incident and this one. The JJ exposure happened as a part of the event amd was shown for a very brief time close within the camera shot. The Fox exposure happened in the background shot of an interview and was was never shown close up in the shot.

walt, it seems youtube took down the link to the Fox exposure. Either it was a copyright infringement or just Youtube's abhorrence to nudity.

Bob S.

[richinoregon]

News to me. The only way you can get fox in my neck of the woods is cable.

[JeepNude]

Who thought having cameras in the locker room was a good idea in the first place??!!! It's a LOCKER ROOM for heaven sakes. The guys are showering and changing, and you want to have cameras in there? Nuts!!

Just a bad idea period. If your camera spots something you don't want it to, you should have no right to complain.

[bafromca]

My sentiments exactly.

[Naturist Zoar]

While filming an interview in a locker room ,wasn't some team mate dancing in the background , this past summer?

[jennan32za]

Who thought having cameras in the locker room was a good idea in the first place??!!! It's a LOCKER ROOM for heaven sakes. The guys are showering and changing, and you want to have cameras in there? Nuts!!

Just a bad idea period. If your camera spots something you don't want it to, you should have no right to complain.

Exactly.

If the networks are worried about this sort of exposure and subsequent fines, they should set up a small interview booth outside the locker room. Or just not interview players while their teammates are trying to get dressed.

Does the US have no common sense anymore?

-d-

[nimrod]

I would think that nudist would think that having cameras in a locker room a good idea because it shows that nudity is natural and there is no need to cover up.