On Wednesday, CBS aired the Victoria's Secret Fashion. On Thursday, Michael Copps, an FCC commisioner, called for the FCC to expand its definition of "indecent." Copps compained that currently, the FCC only acts against material that is "palpably and demonstrably indecent."
Where, oh, where, to begin?. First of all, the Yahoo! News article on the stoy, includes, without apparent irony, a slide show of the fashion show, including some 40-odd pictures of anorexic women in their skivvies. Second, the aptly-named Copps admitted that he didn't watch the show, but presumably this fact poses no problem for one who wants to ban shows that aren't "demonstrably" indecent.
What could this distinction possibly mean? "We think it's indecent, and that's good enough for us, even though we can't actually demonstrate that it's indecent?" "Palpably" is problematic, too. Television, after all, is a purely visual medium. Try as it may have to engage the attention of male viewers, the Victoria's Secret show wasn't palpably anything. No television show is.
It also appears to have escaped Copps's attention that the show was trounced in its time slot by both "The Bachelor" and "The West Wing." Combined, those shows drew almost 40 million viewers, viewers who exercised that most basic of consumer freedoms, the ability to change the channel. But then again, what should we expect from a man who was Fritz Hollings's chief of staff?
Ultimately, though, this story is tragedy rather than farce. Copps appears to be the only member of the FCC who thinks it's a good idea to hold public hearings before eliminating media ownership restrictions. It's a shame he's letting himself be distracted by the partially-nekkid wimmen windmill.