FCC to Regulate 'Profane' Speech

The Importance of writes "The FCC has been regulating 'indecent' speech on the airwaves for quite some time, but have been getting a lot more attention recently. For example, during last year's Golden Globe Awards U2's Bono said 'This is really, really f-ing brilliant.' Last October the FCC ruled that was ok. Yesterday, under political pressure, the FCC overruled that decision. However, for the first time, the FCC also ruled that the f-word is not only 'indecent' but also 'profane.' According to this new decision by the FCC, any speech that is grossly offensive, whether or not it has anything to do with sex or excretion, is 'profane.' This is a major step forward (backward?) for FCC censors. My analysis is here."

Comments

Crap [obligatory swearword in title - CHECK!]

[Space cowboy]

I'd guess that NWA (Niggers With Attitude) will never be played again then, even their name probably breaks the rules; as for thier 'Fuck the motherfucking police', well, I doubt that'll ever see the light of day :-) Guess you guys won't get 'Roger Melly, the man on telly' any more either (if you ever did)

Over here in the UK, the thinking seems to be leaning to more leniency rather than more crackdown. There's an article on the BBC site asking 'Has swearing lost its power to outrage' talking about on-screen profanity...

Simon.

Channel 4 advertisement

[anandpur]

Everyone should watch this latest Channel 4 advertisement

Re:Damn it!

[jeffkjo1]

Democrats voted for the bill, but the bill and this ruling are two different things. The FCC Comissioners are Republicans, appointed by Dubya, and the Chairman's position is an obvious case of nepotism.

It's easy to say that, but the shame of it is it's flat out wrong. Michael Powell was appointed to the FCC in 1997 by President Bill Clinton. Bush made him the chairman, but Clinton put him there in the first place.

Re:Public does not own the airwaves.

[JDRipper]

Actually, the public DOES own the airwaves. Those companies are licensed to use them, not own them. We subscribe to them for their content.

The FCC is unconstitutional

[Hektor_Troy]

The FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, decided all by itself, that radio and televisions were the only two parts of American life not protected by the free speech provisions of the first amendment to the constitusion.

I'd like to repeat that because it sounds vaguely important.

The FCC, an appointed body - not elected, answerable only to the president, decided on its own that radio and television were the only two parts of American life not protected by the first amenedment to the constitution.

And why did they decide that? Because they got a letter from a minister in Mississippi! A reverend Donald Wildman in Mississippi heard something on the radio that he didn't like. Well reverend - did anyone ever tell you there are two knobs on the radio? Two knobs on the radio.

Of course I'm sure the reverend isn't that comfortable with anything that has two knobs on it. But hey reverend - there are two knobs on the radio - one of them turns the radio off and the other one - changes the station! Imagine that reverend - you can actually change the station. It's called freedom of choice, and it's one of the priciples this country was founded upon - look it up in the library reverend, if you have any of them left when you're finished burning all the books!

George Carlin said it, and I support it wholeheartedly.

FCC v. Pacifica Foundation

[Bimo_Dude]

I did a quick google for "George Carlin" and "7 words", and the first thing that came up was a link to this article

I never even knew about this case, but find it quite interesting. That led me to the parent article, which is about the regulation of [what some people consider to be] indecent speech.

IMHO, kids are going to learn these words anyway, and to have them be "taboo" is to make them more appealing for kids to use.

Sign petition on http://stopfcc.com/

[Anonymous Coward]

I encourage you to sign a petition at http://stopfcc.com/

Re:may I be the first to say

[tomhudson]

So

Come to think of it, maybe we should get them to ban the whole Bible. It's one big piece of hate literature - "You're going to Hell unless you believe in Jesus!"

As an atheist, I find this particularly offensive.

I think agnostics and followers of other religions would agree.

So, since the air waves are state-controlled, and we have a doctrine of separation of church and state, religious beliefs have no more place on the public airwaves than the ten commandments or a cross or public prayer have in a schoolroom.

Re:Here in Canada...

[smcavoy]

Actually, it's broadcast... Channel 57 I believe

Howard Stern's Required Reading

[tstoneman]

What is so insane is that the rules for profanity are completely inconsistent. Oprah can have a show talking about "tossing salads" which include a detailed description of what that is, but if Howard Stern says it, he will get fined.

This is a problem for several reasons:

1) Our freedom of speech is killed because we can be fined into bankruptcy for talking edgy, so obviously people will be more careful of anything that they say

2) freedom of speech is completely killed because the FCC can decide months later if what you said was profane, so the feedback mechanism is completely messed up.

3) initial rulings on profanity can be "overruled" by the FCC, meaning that political agendas can be enforced through the FCC now

For a listing of required reading go directly to Howard Stern's web site.

Killing is still in I'll bet.

[Neil Watson]

Meanwhile, television and film can show graphic, glorified murder and only be rated PG13.

Re:Support Howard

[Motherfucking Shit]

Long-time listener, first-time caller.. ;)

Amidst all the indecency crackdowns, and the FCC's announcements yesterday, nobody seems to be pointing out the fact that the ruling against Infinity was for a Howard Stern show that aired in 2001. It's not for anything Howard has said or done recently, and as I understand it, it's more due to what a caller said.

Howard's been playing this game for a long time. He knows the rules, and he knows them well; perhaps even better than most people who work for the FCC. Howard has always voiced his contempt for the rules, but he's (generally) always played within the rules, as well. So why is Howard getting attacked all of a sudden?

For the majority of Bush's presidency, Howard has been a staunch supporter. On September 11 2001, he was on the air telling everyone that it was bin Laden, and that we ought to do something about it. Howard supported the Afghanistan strikes 100%. As time wore on and people grew critical of Bush, Howard stood his ground, even supporting the war in Iraq.

After the Janet Jackson fiasco, when it was obvious that the FCC was gearing up to make some heads roll, Howard suddenly shifted gears. For the past few weeks, his (on-air) political leanings have done an abrupt 180. He's been decrying the FCC and its crackdown, and more importantly, he's been urging listeners to vote Bush out of office.

ClearChannel dropped Stern from 6 stations. It wasn't for anything "indecent." It was because of Howard's recent political about-face.

ClearChannel is owned by a guy named Lowry Mays. Mays is a Texan, and he's got ties to the oil industry. OK, so these days it seems like everyone is from Texas and is an oil baron. How about the fact that GWB sold his share of the Texas Rangers baseball team to a guy named Tom Hicks. Tom Hicks was, at the time, CEO of a company called AMFM. Guess what business a company named "AMFM" was in? That's right, the radio business. AMFM was bought out by ClearChannel, and Tom Hicks is now Vice Chairman of ClearChannel.

Howard Stern had a surprisingly good ride, in terms of FCC scrutiny, under the Bush administration until the past couple of weeks. I think it's because - and only because - Howard had, until that time, been an unapologetic supporter of Bush and the war in Iraq, even to the point where it conflicted with his own liberal interests in terms of broadcasting.

A timeline:

1) AMFM CEO buys GWB's share in Texas Rangers
2) AMFM acquired by ClearChannel
3) Janet Jackson bares areola
4) FCC launches witch-hunt
4a) FCC Chairman Powell is Secretary of State Colin's son, for those who aren't paying attention
5) ClearChannel dumps Stern like a bag of bricks
6) FCC fines Infinity (but not ClearChannel, even though they aired it) for a Stern episode from 2001

Mod me troll if you want, but this is the politics of things. Howard Stern isn't being sought out because he was "indecent." He's being sought out because he jumped the fence, he's being sought out because he's telling 8+ million people a day to vote Bush out of office.

Re:Bad news for Comedy Central

[f00zbll]

Comedy Central is cable, so they aren't under the same restrictions thank god.

Re:may I be the first to say

[ichimunki]

Don't forget to read the opinion of the SCOTUS in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (which resulted from the airing of the actual Carlin routine). Just don't read the Court's decision on the air or the FCC will probably come after you (the controversial bits of the routine are in an appendix to the ruling). ;)

Re:may I be the first to say

[tomhudson]

You have a right not to listen to religious people. You don't have a right to be protected from hearing them saying things you don't like to hear.

When they promote hatred against minorities, such as gays and lesbians, what they are doing is not constitutionally-protected speech, any more than shouting "fire" in a crowded movie theatre is.

Of course, living in Kanuckistan (Ca-na-da!!!), we already have legislation that covers that, and it has been used against one religious group already (Church of the Aryan Nation).

It's only a matter of time ... remember, the States usually follows Canada's lead about a generation later on social issues (remember the Vietnam war and draft dodgers?)

Re:may I be the first to say

[FauxPasIII]

Some context of this:

http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/aa011.htm

Re:Fucking. Not Effing.

[Fros1y]

Actually, the whole point is that Bono actually said "f'ing" (as in eff-ing) instead of saying "fucking" in an attempt to get past the FCC's hissyfits over the word fuck.

Now, the FCC is saying that things like f'ing, s'ing, and calling someone a piece of s. will be actionable, if they are offensive.

Re:may I be the first to say

[tomhudson]

In Canada hate speech is a criminal code offense.

Now, as for hate speech being covered, it's not covered when it incites people to actions against other people.

We've seen too many minorities persecuted "in teh name of God" to allow this to continue.

Violating First Am. through Sloppy Definitions

[billstewart]

Miller's article shows that the FCC doesn't have a clue what "profane" means, and Miller himself is a bit fuzzy though he's at least in the right ballpark.

• "Profane" speech is using something sacred / religious for secular purposes. If the FCC tries to get into that business, it's jumping seriously into the "establishment of religion" parts of the First Amendment, and has entirely no business doing so, especially when its members have demonstrated their incompetence with the territory. Swearing on Bibles in court is profane - the Bible is there specifically because of its religious significance. Saying "Oh, my God!" when you're not talking to God is profane, and the FCC doesn't seem to mind that kind of language on TV. Saying "Fuck You!" might be profane if you're a part of some fertility-worshipping religion, or saying it to someone of that belief set, but in normal American cultural use it's not profane, just offensive. "Shit!" isn't profane; "Holy shit!" sort of is, because of the "holy" part.
  
• "Blasphemy" is saying insulting things about something sacred or religious, particularly a God. Using religious terms profanely isn't usually blasphemy, but can be. Blasphemy used to be illegal in much of the US, in spite of obvious First Amendment problems; Delaware got rid of their hadn't-been-enforced-in-years blasphemy laws in a case back in ~1968 along with the punishment for it, which was the whipping post.
  
• "Vulgar" speech is using language that the common people use instead of the more proper language that the aristocracy and other people Better Than You use. "Having intercourse" isn't vulgar; "getting laid" and "fucking" are. "Horseshit" is vulgar; "horse manure" isn't vulgar if you're talking about farming, but is moderately vulgar if you're using it to offensively dismiss someone's arguments because you weren't willing to make the mental effort to say "Errant nonsense" or "like, totally bogus!" instead.
  
• "Offensive", if you're an Elitist, means anything that of course would offend any proper person, and anyone who's not offended by it is obviously not a proper person. "Offensive", if you're not an Elitist, is just something that offends you, or that's being used to offend someone else. "Fuck you!" is usually intended to be offensive; "Fucking brilliant" is a sufficiently flexible term that could be offensive or high praise or pleased surprise. The FCC is finds both of those terms offensive because they're Elitists who are offended by the choice of language, rather than because they care whether someone is offending someone else.
  
• "Bad Taste" is a lower level of Elitist term, and we are talking about American television here, so 'nuff said cause they ain't going there.
  
• "Expletive" is a grammatical term, as is "pejorative" - President Nixon's expletives got deleted when they were vulgar, which might reflect badly on his character, and left in when they weren't, and so did his pejoratives. (AFAIK, LBJ didn't tape his own office, but wasn't the kind of elitist who worried about people knowing about his use of much more colorful metaphors.) "[Expletive Deleted]! The FCC are a bunch of [participle deleted] [pejorative deleted]s who wouldn't [intensifier deleted] recognize the Constitution if it bit them on their [participle deleted] [noun deleted]s!"
  

Re:may I be the first to say

[chgros]

Considering that in french, almost every "holy" word is a curse word, this could be funny
This is only true of Canadian french, or three-centuries old french. Everyone seems to think the French always say "sacrebleu", whereas it hasn't really been used for centuries, but it is indeed derived from religious words ("bleu" is a modification of "dieu" (god) to avoid blasphemy)

My fucking god, what the hell, etc etc etc....
Is this on purpose that you use god and hell in this?