An Acceptable Level of Indecency?

After reading "Freedom's Curse" by Steven Pinker it sparked my interest on the regulation's the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) creates and to what extent they regulate various forms of our media.

I searched and found the scholarly journal "Indecent" by Morgan O'Rourke from the journal Risk Management.

In the article O'Rourke discusses the 2004 Superbowl and the indecent exposure of Janet Jackson's right breast during the half-time show. O'Rourke mentions the reaction of the FCC; a $550,000 fine for the indecency committed by the CBS network, she also mentions how the company was able to prevent paying this hefty fine. Although CBS was not convicted of this claim
the FCC received a record 540,000 complaints about the incident which directly led to a revision of the commission's indecency policies. The revision involved increasing the indecency fine up to $325,000 per violation from $32,500 5 years ago.

After this O'Kourke discusses her opinion on the matter, "An interesting side-effect, however, is that the FCCs crusade could actually be contributing to the demise of traditional broadcasting. As the airwaves get "safer," it seems that program quality has deteriorated.". She goes on to say that because regular programming is deteriorating, shows that are not available on regular Cable have picked up in popularity, shows like The Sopranos. Another consequence of the FCC's regulation is freestyle radio hosts like David Stern have moved to unregulated satelite radio so he can keep broadcasting the content he chooses to.

O'Kourke goes on to make her last point, whether or not the FCC even needs to regulate this sort of thing. We are told that only 0.6% of Super Bowl viewers complained to the FCC about Jackson's striptease and of these 0.6% of complainers 99% are from a conservative television watchdog group.

O'Kourke's last argument from "Indecent" relates to the argument raised in "Freedom's Curse". If only 0.6% of the viewers that night complained about the extreme content and knowing that 0.6% doesn't represent the population in its entirety, is the FCC's regulation necessary? Pinker seems to believe the FCC's regulations are usually unwarranted and inconsistent, he mentions that curses are no longer used to represent their actual definition but as a way to get a point across with emotion and meaning. It is clear that both of these authors seem to believe the FCC is crying over spilt milk when it comes to profanity in our American media.