The "Story"
Today's non-news comes courtesy of the "story" that will not die, the non-news item we are calling Boobygate. Yes, the never-ending saga of Janet Jackson's bare breast surfaces yet again.

Today we hear, courtesy of Matt Drudge that media giant Sumner Redstone has declared "to me, a woman's breast is not such a big deal."

Normally we at 3N would applaud such bold, plain speaking, but we were appalled to find Redstone still denies Boobygate was a planned affair.

"The FCC knows we're a victim and not a culprit," Redstone said at a media conference in Boca Raton, FL. "It was a complete shock to us when it occurred."

So much for plain talk.

Redstone is not a stupid man yet he obviously believes the general public is. Jackson's Superbowl indiscretion clearly was nothing more than a shameless attempt to revive her sagging . . . career. And it worked. Sort of.

While Jackson briefly enjoyed a spike in radio requests and album sales, Boobygate has blown up in her face and, freakishly, looks to have put an end to Howard Stern's show on the Clear Channel radio network.

It also has morphed into a bizarre new campaign by Congress and the FCC to stamp out indecency wherever it exists. Boobygate has touched off a disgusting display by grandstanding politicos hell bent on making radio and television "decent" again.

3N certainly is no fan of Stern or Clear Channel for that matter, but to be hassling him now, at this late, late stage in his career is pathetic. And so is Boobygate and so is the continued media coverage of this uber non-news story. Only when everyone stops writing about it, covering it, etc., when we stop giving politicians face time and print time, only then will this go away. Janet Jackson certainly has.

The News
So let's instead talk about ethics and decency in the FCC itself. This same federal agency that's determined to save the public from indecent acts sure has committed some of its own recently.

Who can forget last year's debacle where Chairman Michael Powell tried to ram a bill down our throats that would have further consolidated media ownership, loosening the present rules and allowing large media conglomerates to get even bigger and own even more newspapers, radio and television stations in a given market?

Though it was ultimately defeated, Powell was stunned at the public outcry against his plan. He shouldn't have been so surprised when Americans balked at his bizarre mathematical equation of fewer companies + bigger market share = more competition. Even the most feeble-minded citizen figured out that equation didn't add up.

Add that to the story given to us by Molly Ivins and courtesy of the AlterNet, where she describes the gross conflict of interest wherein FCC employees traveled, ate, drank and lived large all at the expense of telecommunications and broadcast interests--the very same people the FCC is supposed to "regulate."

According to Ivins and a study by The Center for Public Integrity, FCC employees accepted nearly $3 million in trips to conventions and conferences over the past eight years to places like Paris, Las Vegas and Rio de Janeiro. There employees were wined and dined by media representatives all under the auspices of open dialog and free communication between the two entities.

This unholy alliance was only recently dissolved, much to the FCC's credit. That story can be found at the CPI website.

A simple search of the AlterNet, Z Mag, Mother Jones, The Progressive or any number of other muckraking publications will turn up more dirt on the FCC.

So how are we to take the FCC seriously when it tries to clean up the airwaves when it can't even keep it's own house in order?