Should the FCC Have Thrown a Flag? - CommPRO

Should the FCC Have Thrown a
Flag?
                        Dr. David Hagenbuch, Ethicist and
                        Professor of Marketing, Messiah
                        College,   Author  of   Honorable
                        Influence,                Founder
                        of MindfulMarketing.org

The latest Super Bowl was another big game mired in
controversy. This time the debate wasn’t whether a fourth-
quarter play was a penalty, but whether the halftime show was
pornography.   Should the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) have thrown a flag for ‘illegal use of the hips’ or
‘unnecessary raunchiness’?     As armchair apologists argue,
mindful marketers aim to analyze the action from each angle,
hoping to make ‘the right call.’

Rocking hips, pulsing pelvises, and legs wrapped around a
stripper pole sound like a scene from a gentleman’s club, but
they were just part of the Super Bowl LIV halftime
show featuring superstar entertainers Shakira and Jennifer
Lopez.

Whether one enjoyed the performances or not, most agree that
the show was a production spectacle, complete with elaborate
scenery, extravagant costumes, moving stages, dozens of
talented dancers, and amazing fireworks. The production level
was fitting for the biggest television viewing event of the
year, which this time drew an astounding 102.1 million U.S.
viewers, making it the “11th most-watched TV show ever.”

With so many people watching the same thing, it’s not

surprising that the show spawned differences of opinion.
Some, like former Florida governor and U.S. presidential
candidate Jeb Bush loved it; he tweeted, “Best Super Bowl
halftime show ever.”

Many ordinary citizens have also sung its praises,
including 2.3 million people who liked the YouTube video.
Some of those fans have said:

     “One of the most amazing shows ever.”—Lucy B.
     “Loved both”–manel manel
     “whos watched this more than 10 times? i know i aint the
     only guy”—Maxwel Rajcic
     “I love JLo but I can’t get over that Shakira
     performance. Damn.”—Annitah Lesley
     “One of the best Super Bowl halftime show ever”—grace
     khuvung

However, a smaller but still substantial number (134K YouTube
viewers) didn’t think the show was ‘so hot’; actually, they
thought it was too hot. Some tweeted:

     “I saw way more of J-Lo than I ever wanted to. There was
     a moment there that actually made me blink my eyes.
     Everybody in the room was blinking their eyes.”—
     @TheAnnoyedMan
     “When your crotch shot reveals your panty liner than
     you’ve definitely crossed a line”—@meredithdicken1
     “I’d settle for a halftime that is somewhere between
     Karen Carpenter and a pelvic exam.”—@Bookwormdearlor
     “My 13 year girl old said ‘man, that was
     TRASHY.’”—@FilthyMcN
     “My 9 year old asked, ‘Is this what sexy
     is?’”—@kdonohuenj
     “It was inappropriate for the venue. They can’t sell it
     as a family entertainment and then present something
     that millions of people had to quickly turn off AFTER
     their little people got an eyeful of soft

porn.”—@Plainsspeak

Maybe detractors are being over-sensitive or narrow-minded,
not giving enough consideration to factors such as:

     The empowerment of women:    The halftime show showcased
     two women’s exceptional voices and dance skills,
     physical strength and stamina, as well as their
     abilities to command one of the world’s largest stages.
     Furthermore, both women are over 40 years of age.
     The celebration of Latin culture: The show served up
     large portions of energy and excitement, along with
     vibrant sounds and colors, for which Latin culture is
     known.

Those are valid arguments that we may not fully appreciate,
depending on our own demographics. On the other hand, one may
wonder if those lauding the performance have considered issues
like these:

     Demographics: Unlike most TV shows, an extremely wide
     swath of the population watches the Super Bowl—everyone
     from two-year-olds to 92-year-olds. The lower end of
     that range should not be exposed to sexually explicit
     content, and many would argue that no one should see it
     without warning at 8:00 pm, on broadcast television.
     Legality: The halftime show may have violated the FCC’s
     mandate that “Indecent and profane content are
     prohibited on broadcast TV and radio between 6 a.m. and
     10 p.m., when there is a reasonable risk that children
     may be in the audience.” It’s hard to imagine that the
     agency would have allowed the same sexual content, which
     included very revealing apparel and highly suggestive
     camera shots, as part of a 30-second Super Bowl
     commercial; yet, the FCC permitted 14 minutes of the
     ‘exposure’ as a Pepsi-sponsored mini-program.
     Addiction:    If the halftime show represented ‘soft
     porn,’ as some have said, there’s a risk that the show

encouraged pornography addiction for some viewers. Lest
     one think that’s a wild claim, check out Google search
     results: In the period from January 29, 2020 through
     February 4, 2020, at the exact time of the Super Bowl
     halftime show, there were extreme peaks in searches for
     terms such as: Hustlers (name of the film about strip
     clubs, staring Lopez), pole dance, stripper, and jlo
     hustlers dance.
     Cultural relativism: Virtually every culture, past and
     present, has had good things to offer, but not
     everything in a given culture is good (e.g.,
     segregation, subjugation of women).       Latin dancing
     is known for its sensuality, which people may debate is
     good or bad, but for the situation at hand, the
     discussion should consider the prevailing culture and
     composition of Super Bowl viewers, as well as when,
     where, and with whom most watched the halftime show.
     Empowerment or Objectification: As implied above, my
     maleness limits my ability to appreciate the ways in
     which Shakira and J Lo’s performances may have made
     other viewers feel empowered. However, as one who has
     studied oversexualization in advertising, I saw many
     signs of objectification of women, i.e., reducing their
     personhood to specific body parts (e.g., legs, bottoms)
     and ‘serving them up’ as objects for others’ sexual
     gratification. For instance, in the YouTube video of
     the performance, there’s a camera shot at about 2:22
     focused just on Shakira’s belly and hips, i.e., no head
     or feet, and another at 7:06 centered squarely on
     Lopez’s bottom, as she bent over, back to the camera.

In an article that includes several helpful illustrations,
Ronnie Richie develops a seemingly useful distinction between
sexual objectification and empowerment, the bottom-line being
that a person is sexually empowered, not objectified, when
she/he holds power versus the person looking at them. That
analysis likely works on one level, such as for superstar

celebrities like Shakira and J Lo, but the reality is that
oversexualized images in mass media often impact others within
the same people group (e.g., women, children) with tragic
consequences.

According to UNICEF, “The objectification and sexualization of
girls in the media is linked to violence against women and
girls worldwide.” On a personal level, former Yale University
student Veronica Lira Ortiz shared her unfortunate experience
as a child in a Latin culture infused with machismo: “I was
twelve years old, and a man on the street [in Mexico] was
already verbally harassing me. He looked at me as if I were a
juicy steak instead of an innocent child. Shakira and J Lo
may have held power in their Super Bowl situation, but many
indirectly affected by their performances do not.

“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” but when the beholders
number over 100 million, including millions of children and
adults anticipating family-friendly entertainment, and when
many others are indirectly affected by what’s shown, the
creators and broadcasters of ‘said beauty’ should demonstrate
better discretion. So, the replay of the action suggests that
the FCC should have flagged Fox, Pepsi, and others associated
with the Super Bowl LIV halftime show for a broadcast
communication violation, as well as for “Single-Minded
Marketing.”

About the Author: Dr. David Hagenbuch is a Professor of
Marketing at Messiah College, the author of Honorable
Influence, and the founder MindfulMarketing.org, which aims to
encourage ethical marketing.