Still, that's not why I'm making this post. It's amazing that an article can be written (even by an al-Reuters reporter) with such a strong anti-FCC bias. I know individuals have conflicting opinions on this issue... I personally consider myself to be pretty moderate (argh, I hate to use that word!) on what should and should not be allowed on TV and radio. Most strongly, I believe it is the role of the parents to... well... parent. Put on the controversial stuff later at night, and have disclaimers prior to the showings. By those rules, I say show anything! I'm actually quite happy to see an uncut movie or TV show such as South Park on later at night. What really stuck out in this article, however, is the following quote: A live, on-field event -- albeit when no athletes were on the field -- during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show, when Janet Jackson's breast was accidentally bared, helped reignite Washington's interest in the indecency issue. Since then there has been a highly charged fight at the commission about just how far the commission can go in restricting broadcasts. OK... I was offended when this happened. Not because a boob was exposed, rather because it occurred during one of the MOST watched shows for the entire year in television, in prime time, with no warnings. We can all joke about the "wardrobe malfunction," and funny jokes they are, but anyone who sincerely believes this was an "accident" has not seen the episode in question. That this article presumes just that is telling.