The FCC gives indecency a bad rap.

• Author: Saltzman, Joe
• Position: Words Images - Federal Communications Commission

IT'S LIKE TUMBLING DOWN the rabbit hole and wondering what has happened to good sense. CBS television is fined $550,000 for showing 18 frames of Janet Jackson's breast (there are 30 frames to a video second). It virtually was impossible to see on a first viewing and only during replays and still frames on the Internet did anyone have any idea what had been flashed on the screen. Yet, the public uproar resulted in a new FCC campaign against something called "indecency."

Regulators also proposed $1,200,000 in fines against 169 Fox television stations for violating decency standards when they aired an episode of the reality program, "Married by America." Apparently, scenes of a topless woman straddling a man, whipped cream being licked off one woman's chest, and an underwear-clad male getting spanked by two female strippers were too much to tolerate.

Clear Channel Communications is being fined $755,000 for sexually explicit segments aired on four Florida radio stations, and another $27,500 is being levied against Young Broadcasting of San Francisco for airing a man exposing himself on a KRON 4 "Morning News" show.

If you think the courts and fair-minded people had a tough time defining "obscenity," wait until they try to figure out what "indecency" is. The FCC definition seems simple enough: "language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities."

Yet, the problem with indecency--as it always has been with obscenity--is what is indecent to one person may be perfectly acceptable, even coveted, by another individual. Moreover, who makes the decision as to what is acceptable contemporary community standards, especially when millions of Americans pay billions of dollars for adult entertainment on the Internet, video discs and tapes, and satellite-cable broadcasts?

Some of us might believe that the new array of sexual commercials on television and radio are indecent: erectile dysfunction (with warnings about penis erections that last for more than four hours); personal lubrication, including a new warming jelly; Victoria's Secret models in skimpy lingerie; sanitary products for females.

Others decry the glut of television and radio pharmaceutical commercials hawking pills for depression, arthritis, migraines, and diseases some of us don't even know about. Many believe these ads not only are offensive...