|
|
LET'S JUST SAY I have a few things I want to get off my chest.
You'll recall that CBS refused to air a couple of advocacy commercials during the Super Bowl because they were "controversial." That's a real hooter--I mean, hoot--in light of what the network did broadcast.
Who will ever again take CBS executives seriously when they try to define "controversial" for the rest of us? It will be hard not to remember them as the bozos who broadcast a peep show during the Super Bowl--not to mention some raunchy beer commercials and a spot for an anti-impotence drug that advised men to see a doctor if the medication causes them to have an erection lasting more than four hours.
Are future CBS Super Bowl broadcasts going to have to carry NC-17 ratings?
Of course, it was the MTV-produced halftime show, featuring the pop singers Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake, that sparked the most attention and, yes, controversy. CBS claimed to be shocked--shocked!--that the singers had made such a boob of the network.
But when I did a Google search after the game to stay abreast of the latest developments in this story, I found an article on MTV.com, dated Jan. 28, in which Jackson's choreographer promised "shocking moments" during the show. Accompanying the article was a revealing photo of Ms. Jackson--pretty much a notice of coming attractions, it turns out.
Let's assume, though, that the bosses at CBS really were unaware that the halftime show would be so lewd. The fact remains that both CBS and MTV are owned by Viacom. Surely we can hold Viacom account- able--or is corporate accountability not in style this year?
This brings us to another absurd aspect of this story. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell, in a statement released Monday, said he had instructed the regulatory agency to open an immediate investigation into the Super Bowl show.
"I am outraged at what I saw during the halftime show of the Super Bowl," Powell said. "Like millions of Americans, my family and I gathered around the television for a celebration. Instead, that celebration was tainted by a classless, crass, and deplorable stunt. Our nation's children, parents, and citizens deserve better."
Forgive me for being unimpressed by Powell's expression of indignation. This is the same man who last year rammed through new media-ownership rules allowing Viacom to buy up more television stations across the nation. Now he's vowing to get tough with the media conglomerate.
We can assume that the FCC will slap some token fines on CBS and Viacom and hope that the whole fiasco quickly fades from the public's memory. But we shouldn't let matters rest there.
Instead, we should use this travesty as an occasion to begin a critical assessment of the nation's media landscape. Powell may be hampered by a credibility deficit, but he's right that the citizens of this country deserve better--including a better FCC, one that crafts media rules favoring the public interest over the interests of the Viacoms of the world.
Such an FCC would roll back last year's changes to media-ownership rules. It would then take a broad look at the possibilities for media reform, encouraging as much public input as possible.
I'd like to endorse one idea (suggested by media activists such as Robert McChesney) that seems timely for an election year: Eliminate paid political advertising on the nation's airwaves, and grant viable candidates a fixed amount of free time to appeal to voters.
That one reform could achieve wonders. It would put an end to politicians handing over obscene amounts of money to networks every election cycle for the privilege of running ads that do nothing but impoverish political discourse in this country.
And with the gargantuan costs of television advertising eliminated, candidates wouldn't have to raise such large sums of money to be electable. That would open up elections to a wider range of people who, generally speaking, would be less beholden to Big Money interests, including media conglomerates.
I know that sounds like quite a dream, but in a democracy, citizens' dreams are supposed to have a chance of becoming reality.
Correction: CBS did broadcast a White House commercial linking drug use to international terrorism, but did so subsequent to its premièr during the 2002 Super Bowl. Last week's column incorrectly stated when the network ran the spot.
RICK MERCIER is an editor and writer for The Free Lance-Star.