WDBJ faces $325K fine for showing 'graphic sexual images' on 6pm newscast in 2012

[mvcg66b3r 97]

The Federal Communications Commission intends to fine WDBJ Television, Inc., Roanoke, Virginia, $325,000 for broadcasting graphic and sexually explicit material during the station’s evening newscast. The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau investigated viewers’ complaints that WDBJ aired a news report that included graphic sexual images taken from an adult film website in the report. This enforcement action would be the highest fine the Commission has ever taken for a single indecent broadcast on one station.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0323/DOC-332631A1.pdf

[ns8401 852]

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0323/DOC-332631A1.pdf

On the other hand those kids will eventually see it one way or the other at some point in their lives... I hate this stupid stuff.

[ToriElectra 291]

Otherwise, up to this point, WDBJ's rep has been sterling; they're a CBS station in the mid-South, so it's no surprise they dominate the ratings and have quality news. For this to happen, someone must've screwed up royal.

[Ntropolis 593]

In case you're wondering exactly what was shown, here's the FCC Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture: http://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-plans-max-fine-against-wdbj-indecent-material-evening-news

 

I don't have children, but if I did it's certainly something I wouldn't want my young child to see, regardless of whether they'll see it "at some point in their lives". I think the fine is justified.

[ns8401 852]

 

In case you're wondering exactly what was shown, here's the FCC Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture: http://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-plans-max-fine-against-wdbj-indecent-material-evening-news

 

I don't have children, but if I did it's certainly something I wouldn't want my young child to see, regardless of whether they'll see it "at some point in their lives". I think the fine is justified.

 

Now that I know what exactly was shown... it doesn't really do much to move my original position... These worries that children will be adversely affected by this is akin to when your grandmother told you that masturbating will make you go blind. I must be some kind of rube... I don't -- and never really have -- seen the big deal. I could go down the road of the kids are created from the stroking of an --- but I won't. These things are almost always much ado about nothing when 90% of the audience probably didn't even notice it on screen for literally 3 seconds.

[GoldenShine9 1509]

Could this hurt their reputation and hit them in the ratings, or will viewers in the market shrug it off, given the dominance of the station?

[ns8401 852]

Could this hurt their reputation and hit them in the ratings, or will viewers in the market shrug it off, given the dominance of the station?

This happened in 2012... Are they still dominant? That might be an answer right there.

[TVNewsLover 730]

Now that I know what exactly was shown... it doesn't really do much to move my original position... These worries that children will be adversely affected by this is akin to when your grandmother told you that masturbating will make you go blind. I must be some kind of rube... I don't -- and never really have -- seen the big deal. I could go down the road of the kids are created from the stroking of an --- but I won't. These things are almost always much ado about nothing when 90% of the audience probably didn't even notice it on screen for literally 3 seconds.

Right, but you are not the parent of every child. What you deem appropriate others may not.

[ns8401 852]

 

Right, but you are not the parent of every child. What you deem appropriate others may not.

 

True... but nobody ever seems to provide an explanation for why these things are wrong beyond "just because they are". When I used that explanation as a kid I got smacked for being sarcastic.