Sep 22, 12:01 PM EST

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Federal regulators on Wednesday fined CBS a record $550,000 for Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction," which exposed the singer's breast during this year's Super Bowl halftime show.

The Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously to slap each of the 20 CBS-owned television stations with the maximum indecency penalty of $27,500. The total penalty of $550,000 is the largest fine levied against a television broadcaster.

Most of the FCC's bigger fines have been against radio stations.

"As countless families gathered around the television to watch one of our nation's most celebrated events, they were rudely greeted with a halftime show stunt more fitting of a burlesque show," said FCC Chairman Michael Powell. "The show, clearly intended to push the limits of prime time television."

The commission decided not to fine CBS' more than 200 affiliate stations, which also aired the show but are not owned by the network's parent company, Viacom.

The two Democrats on the 5-member commission said the fine should have been higher. Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein said the fine amounted to a "slap on the wrist" and suggested that the agency could have sent a stronger message about indecency by reprimanding CBS' affiliates as well.

MTV, a Viacom subsidiary, produced the Feb. 1 halftime show, which featured Jackson and singer Justin Timberlake performing a racy duet. At the end, Timberlake ripped off a piece of Jackson's black leather top, exposing her right breast to a TV audience of about 90 million.

Timberlake blamed a "wardrobe malfunction," and CBS was quick to apologize to viewers. The breast-baring song generated a record number of complaints to the FCC — more than 500,000.

CBS said it was extremely disappointed with the decision.

"While we regret that the incident occurred and have apologized to our viewers, we continue to believe that nothing in the Super Bowl broadcast violated indecency laws," the network said in a statement. "Furthermore, our investigation proved that no one in our company had any advance knowledge about the incident."

Viacom has said it will fight any fines leveled against its stations for the Jackson performance. Over the summer, Viacom co-president Leslie Moonves said a fine would be "grossly unfair" and promised a court challenge.

Federal law bars radio and non-cable television stations from airing references to sexual and excretory functions between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when children may be tuning in. Once a complaint is made to the FCC, the agency determines whether the broadcast was indecent.

Within days of the Jackson incident, lawmakers on Capitol Hill began grumbling about smut on TV, and both houses passed legislation — still pending in Congress — that would raise indecency fines. The House has voted to raise the maximum indecency fine to $500,000. The Senate voted to increase the top fine to $275,000 per indecent incident, with a cap of $3 million per day.

The FCC launched a crackdown on indecency soon after the Super Bowl, resulting in several high-profile fines. Among them: a $755,000 fine against Clear Channel for graphic drug and sex talk on a "Bubba the Love Sponge" radio program and a record $1.75 million fine, also against Clear Channel, for indecency complaints against Howard Stern and other radio personalities.

Television networks also began taking pre-emptive action by implementing broadcast delays so censors could scrub anything deemed too racy. CBS, for example, aired the Grammy awards ceremony a week after the Super Bowl with a five-minute delay. More recently, the NFL kicked off its season with a live, pregame show on ABC that was aired with a 10-second delay.

HA

She has no style like madonna when pulling off a stunt, instead she gets in trouble

jayaredee said:

How can it even be said she pulled off the stunt? Why is Timberlake clean in this whole issue. Didn't he pull off the damn thing?

Then again, the outrage over this incident pisses me off to begin with, but I don't understand why she's blamed for it.

jayaredee said:

Have you forgotten the Erotica era?

jayaredee said:

VoicesCarry said:

or Shanghi Surpise?

I blame Janet for apologizing. With 17 successful years behind you? Justin I can see because his career is JUST taking off, but Janet? Please.

CynicKill said:

Honestly, I can't remember exactly what she said during her taped statement. However, it's a shame that this incident might over-shadow all of her past accomplishments. To my knowledge, this is the first real controversy of any magnitude and subsequent negative press that involved Janet. Of course, some Janet fans are saying that in way, it's great that Janet will be remembered for this performance. But I would think Janet would prefer to be remembered for her contributions to music. Janet is a sentimental favorite of mine because I have followed her career for sooooo long,and dancewise she was an inspiration to me. I was saddened and angered when the media relentlessly criticised her. The whole thing is just a mess.
[Edited 9/22/04 16:56pm]

savoirfaire said:

It was her outfit...she knew how it was made and where it unsnapped...
I can see where they might have not told Justin that a very REAL titty was
underneath that pull off...he's said that there was supposed to be something
underneath. Poor kid.

whateva...i still believe it was an accident. i've watched it over and over again...believe me, i have ...and the look of surprise/shock on her face, combined with her spastic movements to cover up, make me think it was a stunt gone bad.

I don't know why I continue to get pissed about this. Had Madonna done it, she would have been applauded for "Re-Inventing" herself once again and proving she still has what it takes to shock the world. There probably wouldn't have been a single lawsuit and the world would have continued to spin without any backlash.

Revolution said:

Poor kid my ass. Don't be SO naive, Rev.

there's a time and place for everything...

the super bowl wasn't it.

IMO It was planned. The look on Janet's face seemed delayed to me. Those moments (accidents or malfunctions) are instantaneous. Justin should've never been on that stage anyway. Or any stage for that matter. I'm not surprised he responded like a little beeyotch.
She carries the name 'Jackson' so it carries a lot of weight and comes with some controversy anyway. It's a breast America. It's not going to f*ckin' attack you. But in all fairness...they knew it wasn't cable, and that millions of people would be watching. Regardless of your belief in 'public' nudity, the majority of the public still vote (however hypocritical of them) to keep certain things away from their children's view. So in that case it was tacky. Had no artistic merit whatsoever. Would've been more acceptable (for public television) if the stage went pitch black as dumb fuck Timbershit pulled away at the garment. It was as a desperate publicity attempt. Which obviously had major reprocussions. I don't feel bad for any party involved. The saddest thing is that Janet WILL go down in history for a boob shot.
As far as the 'what if Madonna did it'...well Madonna's always done things with a bit of tongue and cheek. And has pushed the limit as far as it can go on a publicly broadcasted network. Her "stunts" have primarily if not exclusively been on cable. She's not dumb..you gotta pay to see her sh*t. And her sexuality, has always had a major or minor part in her performance. Nothing new..20+ years, you'd think Americans would have a clue. Janet's was a case of self prostitution for an album with no reward or benefit on her part!

avatarfunk said:

Exactly.I actually liked Janet's performance.I just think it was wildly inappropriate for a Super Bowl audience.I noticed that Madonna's name has popped up a few times on this thread (surprise,surprise).Maddy has certainly done her share of shocking,attention-grabbing stunts,but she always seems to know the right time and right place for such behavior.Janet should have saved this performance for the VMAs,where it would have not only been applauded,it would have been expected.

SassyBritches said:

It was no accident and it certainly was no "wardrobe malfunction"...lol...she planned it to happen that way.Her and Justin were probably thinking "How can we top the Madonna/Britney kiss?...How can we shock the world like that?".Just my two cents...

SassyBritches said:

I want to believe it was an accident, but Janet has never made it clear what was supposed to happen that night. She's never said,"Look, this is what was supposed to happen...," followed by,"And, this is what did happen...." All she has ever said is that what happened wasn't supposed to happen. That could mean anything! That could mean a "wardrobe malfunction" or Janet planned the stunt but all the backlash "wasn't supposed to happen." Ya know? I think she should have given an interview from the get-go and cleared everything up. Instead, when she went on all the talk shows, she wouldn't talk about it. "It's in the past, blah, blah, blah..."

DavidEye said:

EXACTLY.

Janet has never pulled off a stunt before so she had no clue how or where to do it. Madonna can pull it off cause she knows these things. SHe knows the time and place to do it.

Revolution said:

Poor Justin. He probably had no clue what that evil Janet was putting him up to. She used him to pull off her evil stunt and promote Damita Jo.

VoicesCarry said:

Even during the 'Erotica' era,Madonna never really got into any trouble.She was wise enough to put all the "shocking" stuff into a book (which was wrapped up and kept behind the counter)

DavidEye said:

David, do you have the sex book?

jayaredee said:

DavidEye said:

OMG did you get it when it was first released or get it second hand for $300 on ebay?

DavidEye said:

Oh, please. There couldn't be more sex injected into the halftime show if they added naked pole dancers to the program! Rappers with half-naked hoochies and Britney Spears wearing a barely-there bustier. Why was it NOT an issue when Lil' Kim wore only a nipple pasty to the MTV awards a few years back (and Diana Ross even tweaked it on air!)? LOTS of kids see that show (in fact that's the target audience).

VoicesCarry said:

YOu answered your own questions. To wear something to the MTV awards is one thing but to pull off a stunt at the Superbowl where children are is another. The rating for the superbowl was for family. Janet made it X rated.
The MTV awards or any awards usually have a warning and parents have control over whether their kids watch it or not

jayaredee said:

Oddly enough,I didn't buy it in 1992 when it came out.I bought in 2001 at my local Tower Records....a brand-new,un-opened copy.They had several copies but since it was so rare,they were selling it for a whopping $80 (in '92,you could get it for about $29.99).

VoicesCarry said:

So,you think Janet's performance was appropriate for a Super Bowl audience? I'm the most liberal person in the world,but come on,there's a time and place for everything.There are many people who bring their young kids to the Super Bowl.Janet and Justin's entire performance was based on sex ("I'll have you naked by the end of this song").And even before the boob-baring part,she was grinding her hips into his crotch and if I'm not mistaken,didn't she also perform her 2001 hit "All For You",which includes the not-so-subtle line "you got a nice package all right...guess I'm gonna have to ride it tonight".Like I said before,I liked her performance...it was sexy and fun.But it is NOT for a "family" audience.
[Edited 9/23/04 4:01am]

jayaredee said:

At the most she made it PG-13 - have you watched a movie lately?

And why is it OK to wear the same outfit to the MTV awards, when children are the target audience (even if it is a cable channel)?

DavidEye said:

You still didn't answer my question about Lil' Kim and the MTV awards, which targets children through advertising and content.

And Madonna's performed way more salacious lyrics than that, so it's really hypocritical of you to start slagging on Janet for her lyrics now.