FCC's Powell expresses disappointment over 'Monday Night Football' opening

By JENNIFER C. KERR, Associated Press Writer
November 17, 2004
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The nation's chief media regulator expressed disappointment Wednesday over the steamy locker room opening to ABC's ``Monday Night Football'' broadcast.

``I wonder if Walt Disney would be proud,'' said Michael Powell, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. ABC is owned by The Walt Disney Co.

The opening, which has generated complaints to ABC and the FCC, featured actress Nicollette Sheridan of the hit show ``Desperate Housewives'' in the locker room, wearing only a towel and provocatively asking Owens to skip the game for her. She drops the towel and jumps into the arms of Philadelphia Eagles star Terrell Owens. Sheridan was shown only from behind and above the waist after dropping the towel.



Powell questioned the judgment of those who decided to air the scene.

``It would seem to me that while we get a lot of broadcasting companies complaining about indecency enforcement, they seem to be continuing to be willing to keep the issue at the forefront, keep it hot and steamy in order to get financial gains and the free advertising it provides,'' Powell said during an interview on CNBC.

An FCC spokeswoman said the agency has received a number of complaints about the ABC broadcast, though she declined to say how many.

The complaints will be reviewed and the commission will decide whether or not to open an investigation that could result in a fine against the network. The maximum indecency fine is $32,500 per incident.

ABC quickly apologized for the locker room intro. And the NFL called it ``inappropriate and unsuitable for our 'Monday Night Football' audience.''

ABC has broadcast ``Monday Night Football'' with a 5-second delay this season, a precaution after singer Janet Jackson's ``wardrobe malfunction'' at February's Super Bowl halftime show -- when singer Justin Timberlake ripped off part of Jackson's outfit, exposing her right breast to a TV audience of some 90 million people.

CBS is protesting a proposed FCC fine of $550,000 for the halftime show.

He is a jacka$$.

"we get a lot of broadcasting companies complaining about indecency enforcement"

Enforcement of what rules? Are there written rules or are they those fuzzy rules that are impossible to follow but easy to enforce!

Do you really think ABC cares...sounds like free advertising. After the SuperBowl the broadcasting company saw what kind of press you can get. Do you think there will be a rather large spike in the number of viewers watching Desperate Housewives this week???

Man, this is crazy - the ONLY valid argument I'll accept about this is that it was 6pm on the left coast, middle of dinner-time, and caught some kids unsuspecting.

As to the rest - yes, it was a football telecast, but hate to break it to everyone, there's been a huge crossing of the line between sports and crap-entertainment for years...other than the stupidity factor, no one's saying that the "sacked" bit should be off, so the "stick to football" factor really isn't important.

Yes, it was a bit risque - but again, other than the left (and mountain) coast, it was primetime - barring actual nudity or simulated sex, and this wasn't really close to that, that's the way we've gone. Protest the show if you want, but leave the NFL out of it.

Yes, the audience is different - so? It's called cross-promoting. It's going to happen, and they did it to get people talking - seemed to work.


Something was said on the Rome radio show (and mind you, usually I think he's an idiot) when I was in the car afew hours ago, and I've been thinking the same for a bit - if this was Brett Favre instead of TO, is this such a big deal to so many people? Combination of people already hating TO, and simply the fact he's black, plays into this - if you don't think it has some bearing on the outcry from some, you're sticking your head in the sand.

In general, ABC and TO are about the only ones handling this ok - Yes, I did it, and yea, maybe if I rethought, I'd go a different direction, but did we really go to such a level that the FCC needs to comment?

Again, maybe I can buy someone in CA saying "we usually throw on the game at dinner time, and my 5 year old was taken aback"....other than that, just don't see it needing everyone and their brother commenting and looking for action, and sure as hell don't need the FCC involved.

In Dallas it was 8PM. I expect lots of young Cowboy fans were watching.

Not just 5 year olds in CA.

I would like to express my disappointment that the FCC has been so outspoken about this kind of trivia over the last four years while at the same time allowing media supercompanies like Sinclair Broadcast Group and ClearChannel to thrive.

/rant short and sweet, complete

I agree - and I'll state this - if you are old enough to be watching primetime tv, you're old enough to see what that was. And while yes, that should be up to parents, then you better just tape everything in primetime, cause the Miller Lite beer chicks wrestling was worse than that, and that was on every MOnday night game...

Here is my problem with the whole thing. My ability to make a choice was taken away from me. Just like the Janet B BBy incident. If they had said that "nudity" was part of the half time show, I could have changed the channel and come back to the game (I wouldn't have changed the channel, but I can see why others would have based on THEIR beliefs). The networks don't want this because they lose $ if people are changing the channel, so they would rather surprise us and deal with the consequences later.

If they want to air this stuff, and it doesn't offend me personally, they should let you know AHEAD of time, so that you can make the appropriate choice for you family.

This is a perfect example of the Left not "getting it". Why would anyone be upset at those who, because of their values, would not want to "expose" (pardon the pun) their children, or themselves for that matter, to this type of "entertainment". I don't feel it was that big a deal, and don't agree with those who do, but the point here is that tolerance HAS to go both ways! The ability to choose to see it or not was taken away. By the time you turn it off, you are half way through and the "damage" has been done.

I understand why others would be upset with the stint, I'm not, but understand those who do, AND RESPECT the fact that they feel that way.

If anyhting about this upsets me is that, as with Janet, my ability to choose was taken away from me. It is obviously a philisophical difference that bothers me about these things, not an actual specific event.

I never turn ABC on until 9:10 pm. I find most of this fluff pretty stupid, and not at all entertaining. Having said that, I also agree that there is much worse stuff on the tube, but some shows are "supposed" to be family shows, like MNF, but do often cross the line as far as some parents are concerned. The parental control on most TV and cable boxes allow those parents to deny thier kids access to "adult oriented shows", as it should be.

I'm not for censorship, but I just don't think that bit, and some of the commercials should be aired on so called family shows. Maybe this new uproar will have some positive affect on the commercials as well.

Let's face another fact. ABC KNEW it would cause an uproar, and got exactly what they wanted, publicity that no amout of money can buy. That show, from what I've seen of the clips, is for no brainers anyway. I guess ABC figures all football fans have no brains. Loins, yes, brains, no.

McBoog....it is a perfect example of the right not getting it...you are saying a woman in a towel is worse than adult men trying to kill eachother on a field. Sexuality is worse than violence...interesting. Do you look away from the tv in disgust when the camera oogle the cheerleaders???

If all you want is the game, turn it on at 9:20 est. There is ALWAYS some crazy pregame cheese that ABC adds on.

I agree that the stunt was probably not the smart thing to do. There are a lot of people who were bound to get upset, plus, like the Janet Jackson episode, it was crass commercialism. Janet wanted to promote her upcoming album with a moment nobody would forget, and ABC wanted to cross-sell it's TV series.

I pretty much think they should just show the football. As for the cheerleaders, they are dressed no worse than any high school cheerleader, even those going to Christian high schools.

Now I get it, 320lb man trying to kill a quarterback, family fun. A woman in a towel, grown up tv. Do you guys change the channel during soap commercials? How about the 'organic experience' shampoo commercials. Or every beer commercial. I think most if not all Americans should have bigger things to worry about. It was a stupid skit, get over it. Christ, you guys still whine about a 1/4 second flash of a nipple. Check out the internet sometime, nipples are the least of your worry.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Guess they couldn't find a white guy on the Eagle's team. Bet her parents were so proud of her hanging on that mandingo idiot.

You are a complete idiot. At least you've stuck to something you're good at.

This is gone way to far and I am ashamed to be an American. We are horrified by a girl showing her back, Janets breast and the president getting a B*** J**, but yet when we attack a soverign country (which we would sanction any other country for) nobody questions s***.

As for the racial inplications. They were just getting the two most popular people in both arenas BOTTOM LINE. Get over it, I personally thought it was lame, but the whole mess is absurd now. I feel sorry for those who have nothing better to do than be outraged by this.

Yes; truth and common sense.

NO I didn't say any of that! You are obviously either lazy OR a goobertard and didn't understand what I wrote.

What I am saying is that I am tolerant and understanding of people's differences and that their CHOICE to be exposed to this stupidity was taken away. I can understand why others were offended and should have been at the very least forewarned that it was coming so that they could make THEIR CHOICE.

Obviously you don't care about the FREEDOM we have to make in this country regarding our FREE WILL to make choices as lond as they do not hurt others FINANCIALLY or PHYSICALLY. An announcement before the skit, as is done with other aired programs, advising that "the following MNF intro, may contain content blah blah", would have been sufficient to give people a warning that you may want to change the channel for a few minutes.

You "lefties" define "tolerance" as absolute acceptance of what you believe, and are intollerant of people who believe differently.

As a good conservative, I believe in protecting EVERYONE'S right to make their choices, independent as to my agreement or not in their position as long as it does not hurt me or mine financially or physically.

You further don't understand that I for one like B Bs and don't think they show enough of the girlies doin' they thang. Where in my post do I say otherwise?

Now, back to my favorite porn site and catch rag

edited to add:

What game are you watching. When do these guys try to kill each other. I played football for 17 years of my life and NEVER tried once to kill anyone.

Now, go back to your Xbox my child.

Everyone saw a nekkid back. Thats it! BFD......No acts were performed. Things were implied and suggestive, and the adult mind forms its own conclusions.

Powell is a d!ck anyway, and can thank daddy for his job. Unqualified pwazzy.....

Ok McBoog..I do play XBox, but I am not retarded. I do see your point. I don't think that will change until people simply stop watching. With the advent of cable television, networks have been trying anything to stop the slow bleed of viewers away from their shows. While there will always be a large group of people who want to watch the Golden Girls, the most popular demographic...that Male 18-whatever, that actually buys things is moving to cable where they have more freedoms. I guess sports will never completely go to cable because of the insane amount of money they are making from the commercial stations.

One way around this would be shows having to create an accurate rating system. I know with my DirectTV, I can block shows that are adult or PG13ish. If parents were able to set this, then that show would not have aired on their tv and they would know why, something was being aired that might not be appropriate for children. If parents choose to bypass it, then it is there problem.