Janet Jackson’s infamous "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Superbowl precipitated a nationwide controversy. To judge by the hysterical reaction, one would think that nothing so shocking had ever been seen on television. Yet, remarkably, during the conservative 1950s, similar breast-baring accidents on television (by Faye Emerson and Jayne Mansfield) raised barely a stir. Is America on the verge of another puritanical era? Is this new Puritanism the result of something more than just concerns for public decency? First Amendment and emerging technology specialist Frederick S. Lane examines America’s changing attitudes toward decency and the politics of decency in this timely book. He takes a strong and unequivocal position that it is inappropriate and dangerous for the government to try to regulate morality. He accuses religious conservatives of starting "decency wars" for motives no more noble than profit and political gain. As Lane astutely points out, such controversies generate a flood of books, speeches, and syndicated radio and television programs. More importantly, they fill the coffers of conservative politicians and "non-profits." Lane first sets the stage for the current controversy by reviewing the history of the decency debate from the invention of the camera as the catalyst for public decency concerns, through the mixing of morality and politics by the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition, to the recent activist stance by the Federal Communications Commission against perceived indecency. He spells out strategies for combating the rising influence of the Religious Right’s puritanical ploys by emphasizing that decency standards are a private and personal responsibility, not a matter of law enforcement. He asserts that we must continuously educate the public regarding the ruinous effects of government censorship, watered-down textbooks, and homophobia. Moreover, he stresses the supreme importance of supporting existing and new organizations to counteract the propaganda from groups like the Christian Coalition and Focus on the Family. Detailing the degree to which Fundamentalist religion has pervaded current politics, entertainment, and society at large, this compelling book is essential reading for understanding one of the most fiercely debated social issues of our nation.
Frederick S. Lane is an author, attorney, expert witness, and lecturer who has appeared on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, the BBC, and MSNBC. After graduating from Amherst College and Boston College Law School, Lane clerked for two years for the Honorable Frank H. Freedman, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts. After practicing law for five years and writing his first book, Vermont Jury Instructions -- Civil and Criminal (with John Dinse and Ritchie Berger), Lane launched a computer consulting business that in time led to his current work as a computer forensics expert and author.
A broad, meandering look at the history of religious and political attempts to impose "decency" on the American culture. Though there is a brief look at pre-20th century decency crusaders, such as Anthony Comstock and the YMCA, the book's focus is on the 20th century up until the present time.
Topics covered include attempts to censor books, art, and the various broadcast media, through the efforts of the religious right wing, conservative politicians, and industry self-regulation (the FCC, the film industry) in response to pressure from the previous two sources. Also covered are the setbacks that the deregulations of the Reagan years had on those who would regulate the nebulous concept of decency in our country.
Religious and political "hot-button" issues perceived to be matters of decency, such as abortion, gay rights, and stem cell research are also covered. Particular attention is paid to how political conservatives have long given lip service to the religious right wing in order to gain their votes, but have delivered very little action to back up their campaign promises to "clean up" America.
The concluding chapter suggest some strategies to promote the true meaning of decency, which differs significantly from the religious conservative concept of it
The critical issue is not, ultimately, who is sleeping with whom or what body parts might be visible; the central question should always be whether this nation is treating its own citizens with basic human compassion and is a moral participant in the world community. Those are decency wars worth fighting.
I took one star away because I thought that the author devoted too many pages (the prologue and the entire first chapter) to the Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction at the 2004 Super Bowl, which could have been more succinctly covered in a few paragraphs. Otherwise, this was a fascinating read.
Coverage of different battles throughout history--from the banning of sending obscene pictures through the mail during the Civil War, to attempts to clean up the internet, including many stops along the way--like the notable Janet Jackson Incident of the Superbowl in 2004. Fairly nonbiased throughout, until the end, when in the recommendation section the author notes that it is far more indecent to, say, invade non-threatening countries, or leave hurricane victims stranded, than it is to have boobies on television.
For anybody who questioned the hysteria that erupted after Janet Jackson's nipple pastie was exposed for exactly 9/32nd of a second in the Super Bowl halftime show a few years back, this is an excellent history of censorship in America. Starts with Janet, moves back to Henry VIII (I'm not kidding), and works it's way back forward to the present day. Really interesting. As I come to find out quite often, what you think is something that's just started happening in our culture in the last 10 or 20 years has often already been going on for centuries.
A good overview of the attempts at social control of "decency" and by extension sexuality, in the U.S. Lane provides a good background on relevant Supreme Court cases and media regulation. It doesn't delve as deep as it could, or provide enough analysis as I would have liked, but it is a good read nonetheless.