http://www.lovebscott.com/news/oh-my-nfl-network-accidentally-broadcasts-a-locker-room-full-of-naked-bengals-players-video

^ post game interview in locker room with nude athletes all around. So much ass. But not too much. Not enough, really.

and you realize you hit jackpot
that night.

so much casual nudity.

just guys hanging out being guys...

>and you realize you hit jackpot
>that night.
>
>so much casual nudity.
>
>just guys hanging out being guys...

It's okay that you don't know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aperQxsDio

to have the interview so soon in the locker room after the game. Maybe the cameraman could've found another angle.

w/better angling and timing we could've seen MORE ass.

i dunno where you even heard that.
you got life fucked up.

i ain't never heard of that.

sports team will make the straight players uncomfortable bc they will be looking at their nakedness in the locker room.

The response is usually something like "chile please, as the fuck if."

It would be creepy to gawk if i was
IN the lockerroom.

but i am not, am i?

jesus you're dense
think whatever you want.

that applies to anywhere numnuts.

A) the locker room was an example
B) who said gawk...i said look.

So do you.

that's creepy.

I ain't in that room though.
so...

lmao, IT'S IN THE GAY BOY'S CODE, BREH, WHY YOU VIOLATIN!?!

"It's {their} bodies, and it should be {their} choice, and the fact that it is not {their} choice is absolutely disgusting. It is not a scandal. It is a sex crime. It is a sexual violation. It's disgusting. The law needs to be changed, and we need to change. Just because {they are} public figures, just because {they are athletes}, does not mean that {they} asked for this. Anybody who looked at those {videos}, you're perpetuating a sexual offense. You should cower with shame."
(c) Jennifer Lawrence



</sarcasm>

and its up to the person violated to determine that,

I would think of all your years preaching that here , you would know that angle.

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2015/10/19/9570823/andrew-whitworth-upset-over-naked-bengals-controversy-media-in-locker

In here like Red on Friday
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Uc4SDf3aac&feature=youtu.be&t=79

i understand any of the players involved being upset about having pix of their ass cheeks broadcast all over the world. however, given that they were in a locker room where they know reporters and cameras can be present the players don't have the same expectation of privacy as a person who poses for a sexy selfie or even a sex pic taken by a lover.

so, nice try. but...no.

But you obviously are trying to distract attention from the issue at hand

and from the comments below I think you understand how and why this is wrong.

I'll just leave at that and enjoy you being wrong.

includes a reference to J Law's response to The Fappening. The Fappening involved the release of J Law's stolen sex pix via the Internet, among other things.

in response to #9 i said 'good try but nah'. you came back in reply #12 w/some attempt at being cute. i shot it down by referring to the controversy referenced in reply #9 which i thought you also referenced as you tried to be cute.

the other side of things, Ill try to respond in a better place next time :)

Still wrong tho

and i have no problem being 'wrong' here. whatever that means.

b/c...ass.

*shrugs*

>i understand any of the players involved being upset about
>having pix of their ass cheeks broadcast all over the world.
>however, given that they were in a locker room where they know
>reporters and cameras can be present the players don't have
>the same expectation of privacy as a person who poses for a
>sexy selfie or even a sex pic taken by a lover.
>
>so, nice try. but...no.
>
>I wonder would the response be the same if a camera man just busted into the changing room of a beauty pageant without getting an ALL CLEAR from the women changing.....

>>I wonder would the response be the same if a camera man just
>busted into the changing room of a beauty pageant without
>getting an ALL CLEAR from the women changing.....

oh i'm sure the gen pop and media would treat that situation differently.

in large part b/c the beauty pageant contestants and their representatives wouldn't have signed contracts where they agreed to allow reporters and cameras access to their dressing rooms while they dress and undress.

and i wouldn't have made a post like this one b/c boobies don't thrill me like the ass in this video thrills me.

http://i.imgur.com/b8mdnPS.gif

did anybody pry to get these pics?
maybe i missed that part.

And even worse, celebrating them.

They had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the locker room, given that this rarely happens.

The big controversy around The Fappening was that it was argued that people shouldn't be viewing the leaked photos because the people in them didn't want to be seen like that.
The viewers were violating almost to the degree of the leakers (and I agree).

Same issue here. The people in this video don't want to be seen like that. Andrew Whitworth said as much.
But still people are passing the video around and celebrating the fact that he is naked in it. That is wrong

but what do I know, not a big deal right?

i'm assuming it went out over the air, they are liable for an fcc violation as well.

NFL Network is a cable channel. FCC regulates broadcast channels.

they saw the cameras?
and the reporter?

This is similar to s
stealing private movies how?

you're an idiot.


>And even worse, celebrating them.
>
>They had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the locker
>room, given that this rarely happens.
>
>The big controversy around The Fappening was that it was
>argued that people shouldn't be viewing the leaked photos
>because the people in them didn't want to be seen like that.
>The viewers were violating almost to the degree of the leakers
>(and I agree).
>
>Same issue here. The people in this video don't want to be
>seen like that. Andrew Whitworth said as much.
>But still people are passing the video around and celebrating
>the fact that he is naked in it. That is wrong

Just like the Fappening folks

so yes there was an expectation to privacy.

and the reporter?

cool.

but i understand.

Cameras are rolling in the locker room all the time but 99% of the time do not air anyone naked.

i am shocked.

>Cameras are rolling in the locker room all the time but 99%
>of the time do not air anyone naked.

sowhat does it better

>sowhat does it better

http://i.imgur.com/uFUrlBb.gif

the live part is what made this story weird.

the interview could've worked as conducted if it'd been recorded for air and the various naughty bits were edited out. and if they couldn't be edited then maybe the interview is done over again or just scrapped altogether. why they decided to air that one live puzzles and thrills me.

If they do air live, they usually announce it to the room or have the interviewee against a wall or something.

Sometimes they air the coach addressing the team as a whole and they may record live(slight delay) but its usually announced.

one of the better things to happen in sports this past weekend.

which allows reporters and cameras to be present for an interview in that circumstance.

maybe that policy should change if the players aren't comfortable w/having their naked ass cheeks broadcast for the world to see.

it actually is against it, fcc policies and general common sense.

the weird part of this IMO is the live broadcasting. i dunno why the network decided to air this interview live.

i dunno if this will amount to a violation of the CBA and if there's anything actionable going on here.

and if so - i'm still thrilled that this happened.

but only slightly b/c i've seen more and better ass in other situations. hell, i watched porn w/more and better ass shortly after i saw this video for the first time. so this ain't all that much to me. i'm in it for the lulz.

not so much that it was caught on camera. So your boy's argument above that he knew the cameras were there or your argument about the media policy is irrelevant, bc they violated it by airing it.

i haven't reviewed the CBA.

have you?

if so please quote the relevant language.

on tv is a violation?

lol

'violation' of what?

some cable channels regulate themselves in consideration of their advertisers who don't want to have their products associated w/violent or sexually-explicit content. but the FCC isn't involved. this is AFAIK. if you know otherwise i'm ready to read.

https://www.fcc.gov/guides/program-content-regulations

Q: What rules, if any, apply to sexually explicit programming?

A: Section 505 of the 1996 Act states that cable operators, or other multichannel video programming distributors who offer sexually explicit adult video programming or other programming that is indecent on any channel(s) primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented programming, must fully scramble or block both the audio and video portions of the channels so that someone who does not subscribe to the channel does not receive it. Until a multichannel video programming distributor complies with this provision, the distributor cannot provide the programming during hours of the day when a significant number of children are likely to view it.

However, Section 505 was challenged in the courts. On May 22, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Playboy Entertainment Group v. U.S., determining Section 505 unconstitutional. Therefore, the Commission's rules implementing Section 505 can not be enforced.

FCC does not deal with cable channels. Cable channels do employ their own standards and practices lawyers who act as an FCC to their own shows. But that is more to not lose sponsors.

People have apologized for it. The fact that this is a story demonstrates how rare this is.

So it is reasonable to say that the people in that locker room had the expectation that they would not appear naked on national tv. One person whose ass was shown came out and make a statement about it.

Even still, you feel comfortable gawking at the images and crowing for more scenes of unwitting nakedness?
That is creepy

all day and all night.

i own that.

and i love this story.

?

properly so.

She wanna point out Navorro Bowman's cute tush

I'm just trying to figure out the pros and cons of our coverage schemes

b/c a better girl can appreciate the players and the game.

that good double standard

joe, you're cool and all, but cmon man. you've taken on a major superiority complex around here lately.

shrug.

noice

and the dudes in the video at issue had all just participated in a game where they wore form-fitting, body-hugging tights over jock straps in front of thousands of spectators knowing their images could be broadcast live to an audience of millions.

of course, that's not the same as having their naked buttocks broadcast live for thousands. and later published on the Internet for an audience of millions. for posterity. no pun.

so i feel the dudes feeling some kinda way. and i don't care much b/c i like ass.

but they really are wrong. No excuse needed. Dude felt violated, regardless of what social norms folks are trying to conjure up.

Which highlights the parody in all of this, in ways I'm sure folks can see.

your guy Andrew Whitworth says:

"It doesn't bother me personally," said Whitworth, as reported by Local 18's Joe Danneman.

"It doesn't bother me personally," said Whitworth, as reported by Local 18's Joe Danneman. "But, as a guy who has always been against this policy (allowing reporters into NFL locker rooms), I think it's a great example why the open media room policy is old and needs to change."

being seen naked does not bother him but its STILL an invasion of privacy. As an individual he has that right.

you saying he doesnt?

you said:

"Dude felt violated"

but Whitworth himself said:

"It doesn't bother me personally"

the remainder of the quote didn't address whether Whitworth felt violated. and the part you quoted doesn't contradict Whitworth's statement about not being personally bothered nor does it confirm your position that he felt violated.

>being seen naked does not bother him but its STILL an invasion
>of privacy. As an individual he has that right.
>
>you saying he doesnt?

LOL. i won't even bother w/this straw man.

and for some unknown reason(s) you're pretty fixated on my being 'wrong'. i dunno what that's about. meanwhile i'm fixated on ASS.

oh well.

back to the ass.

lol

and i'm going to have to agree with that post game analysis.

and all ya'll sanctimonious mfers watched, too.

LOL

i love the 'wowee zowee'. and the ass, of course.

Damn, it's just nekkidness! And a small serving thereof.

they're trying to get at me for having defended women and gays in the past. and b/c some of them think i'm right and they resent me for it.

^ these are my assumptions. b/c otherwise these ppl are just fools. and i'm trying to give them credit for attempting to be clever.

meanwhile i'm pretty focused on the ass of it all. b/c...ASS.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

let's not act like we see an ass like that everyday...