Slashdot Mirror
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."
I'm so torn on this subject. It's something that I think has so many valid points on either side. If I plan on watching something like the Grammy's or some other award shows (or the Super Bowl halftime show) I don't at all expect to be seeing or hearing some of the crap I have seen. With that, I can see how regulations and stricter rules are a must. But then I see how far government agencies can take things...
*sigh* A struggle more eternal than Linux and SCO...
Do the FCC even have the right to add new things to the list of what they regulate? It was my understanding that they enforced decency regs, but could not define them.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
Many people find Howard Stern's show to be grossly offensive, however many other people love it. If Stern's show really stepped over the line, people would stop listening to it. If people stopped listening to it, the show would be canceled, and he would be off the air.
I don't understand how Republicans get away with this level of hypocrisy. They are in favor of privitization and less Government regulation of businesses, except when it comes to what can be said in the media. Republicans are in favor of states' rights, except when it comes to a state choosing to allow same-sex marraige. Republicans are "ultra-moralistic" in their own minds, impeaching President Bill Clinton for lying about a sexual relationship, but when it comes to a Republican aide in the Senate hacking into sensitive Democrat files, only Orin Hatch has the honor to stand against it.
The FCC's ruling is really, really fucking awful.
~JISA
Lord forbid that YOU have to raise your little cracker spawn. That's what the TV's for right? Read my sig, it has a special relevance to people like you who expect the government to protect your children from your own bad parenting.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Well, if we go by my definition, I find said FCC ruling to be grossly offensive, as it clearly violates the constitution!
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
"Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there."
-- Clare Booth Luce, American playwright and diplomat
The FCC is a failed entity. They had one simple task -- keep broadcasters from "stealing" or "leaking" onto bandwidths that they were not assigned to use. They failed so miserably new technologies were invented to do their job. They were about to go away when Nixon gave them the power of the Seven Dirty Words.
Where does the money from fines go?
Who needs them to regulate anything?
I have 2-13 piped into my house through cable and or satellite therefore I pay for those stations, how dare they regulate what I pay for!
The FCC must be abolished.
This
For example, during last year's Golden Globe Awards U2's Bono said 'This is really, really f-ing [sic] brilliant.'
Who needs the FCC when people decide that words like 'fucking' needs to be self-censored? If you're going to fucking quote someone, fuck, man, QUOTE THEM. You're caving in against your own fucking thesis.
[
you seem to be serious?!? so i'll bite. i'm also a father with children. that's beside the point.
the fcc is effectively acting as the judicial and legislative branches when it's deciding what is and isn't moral for the ears of both adults and of children.
as a father with children, its your responsibility to monitor what goes in those little ears, and to teach those young 'uns some respect along the way. that's how societ has digressed to a more disrespectfull society. not because some T.V. show uses the word shit or fuck too many times. its because the parents aren't there to monitor their children. they're off earning their 6 figure salaries so they can send the kids to daycare and off to after school activities to lessen the family time together.
you don't like what's on the air waves? get rid of the television. you don't like what's on the radio (read: stern), do away with the radio. your children will be better off by it (though i'm not giving mine up, i'll just watch it with the kids).
we don't need some beauracratic (sp) entity to give moral guideance to our children. we need to accept responsibility for our children's upbringing and take action for that. i would much rather have no fcc involvement in the content that is transmitted across the airwaves. sure, i'd personally use my parental controls if there were a 24x7 playboy type channel on the public airwaves, because i think the freedoms outlined in the constitution have more value than the regulations that are far too often implemented.
It doesn't hurt kids to swear, or to hear swearing.
It hurts kids to not teach them boundaries, and to excuse them when they do things 'to get rises out of people.'
" As a father with children, or just a human being for that matter, it's disturbing how society continues to slide towards being more disrespectful and crass toward each other."
And as a father who is raising our kids to understand that words are merely words, and that some are extremely offensive to others, and to have both the maturity and restraint to know WHEN such cases apply, allow me to say that the FCC can go fuck themselves.
This is a MAJOR problem in the US. We keep expecting society to "protect" our children from themselves. Whatever happened to parents actually parenting? Bad things on TV? TURN THE DAMN THING OFF! Read a freakin' book! Play a game with them! Take them hiking! And instill in them a BASIC FREAKIN' MORAL COMPASS and the ability to think critically!
So who is protecting 5 year olds from parents who drop the F-bomb at home? Maybe we need to regulate speech there as well.
...
On the other hand, if I don't want the kids to listen to something on the radio, I turn it off or change the channel
Thank you for supporting the Ban on Nipples on TeeVee, but don't you dare try to shut down wholesome things, like when two football players smack together and one of them gets a broken leg or neck. That shit is the bomb! ...and it helps Timmy build character!
Yeah, right.
The world as a whole is not 5 year old safe nor should it be. If you don't want your kid to hear it don't let him watch it, or maybe you should teach your kid about it, he's gonna hear it eventually.
The darkness... controls the music. The music... controls the soul.
Too fucking bad. Does the word fuck on slashdot bother you? Too fucking bad, don't fucking read slashdot :) [Don't like TV? Don't watch it. Loss of ad-revenue hurts the execs more than a fine for swearing. Let the market control language and profanity. Oh yeah, you have a god-given right to get whatever you want 100% of the time. Now I see...]
Seriously, too bad if kids were watching the Superbowl. Actually, not really. There are bad words in the world. People fuck. Stop shielding them from the real world.
Honestly, you'd better not let your wife breastfeed your kids. They might see a nipple. And no sex for you two either. What if they walk in!???
My other car is first.
I sort of agree wtih you. I dislike how the whole negative connotation that swearing has earned. I view the word fuck as any other word in the English dictionary... A fucking word! It has its general definition, regional variations in usage and context and what not. But that's it. I hate how this whole stipulation of "bad" words keeps on prevailing in America. The same goes for visual censorship. The word fuck is constantly used in everyday language by many people commonly, quite a few still not so commonly, and at least everyone once in their life. Personally, I view the US's energy to censor words and nudity as a weakness. Go to Europe, you'll see a lot more mature view about the human body, and a lot less of the "oh my! taboo" bullshit here. Censorship sucks :(
When I signed up for cable television, I purchased access to crash, abusive, violent, sexual, morbid, humerous, and offensive content. If I wanted to watch purple dinos and signing hand puppets I could get that with public television over the airwaves. I PAID for access to the offensive stuff. I LAUGH at kids getting ninja throwing stars stuck in their eyes.
I did not pay money to have a television raise your fucking kids. I support child care programs with tax dollars, but using laws and regulations to replace parenting with a TV is too much.
--Tsiangkun
Still, I would prefer to be the one in control when it comes to what I or my children watch, read or listen to. Not the government. Why right does the government have to disagree over what a parent has a responsibility for? Republicans say it's okay to take responsibility for firearms in my house but not a radio?
As for the slide in society, do we blame people for the verbage of others? I think it has more to do with people taking liberties without being responsible for them. "Hey, some singer says an f-bomb so that mean I can say the f-bomb whenevery I want." That is someone not taking a responsibility for acting civil in public. If someone sees a rape in a movie, commits rape, do you go after the movie or the criminal? If someone kills because of the bible do we start censoring the bible or prosecute the murderer?
What nerves me about the whole situation is that this FCC business is not about decency, it's about power (and money i.e. power).
-Phil
Shoot questions, first ask later...
People should not be subjected to it or forced to listen to this stuff
Yes, I'm all for repealing the law requiring all citizens to listen to Howard Stern for 3 hours a day.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Let's be honest and clear about this too - it is not just the FCC who is doing this, they are getting lots of pressure from the religious right on these issues. This is a perfect example of how a specialty group is directly influencing the government.
The FCC looks like a bunch of idiots over these issues. They are bringing up issues that are *YEARS* old, and fining people for them. The issue they are fining Howard Stern over is from 2001.
I listen to Stern on occasion, and have been more frequently recently. This morning was a fantastic illustration of how stupid this all is. He played a clip from the Jimmy Kimmel show, where Jimmy was defending Howard. He said that they should be going after the filthiest person on TV - Oprah. Jimmy then played a clip from the Oprah show, where she was talking with some women about sex things. They were laughing and having a good time. One of the women mentioned "tossing salad" , and then proceeded to describe what it was. When Howard played this clip, it was bleeped (time delay removed) from his show. He begged his GM to let him play the clip. It was from Oprah, which runs in the mid-afternoon.
Here is the point - Oprah can get away with this kind of talk on her show, but Howard gets fined for something not nearly as graphic from 2001? He has a great argument - if they play the clip and get fined, the FCC would HAVE to fine Oprah. They would never fine Oprah. If they didn't, they would be obvious hypocrites, and if they did they would be showing the world how stupid they are behaving. You don't mess with Oprah. It would make national news if Oprah was fined for indecency.
It is all a big joke, and the religious right is standing firmly behind this one. They have strong ties to Senators (giving them cheap housing) as well as other government officials. Hell, some government officials ARE part of the religious right - all the way up to the drunk-driving President and Vice President. (1 and 2 offenses respectively)
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
This just reminds me, yet again, of how messed up Americans' values are in so many ways, a fact that was first brought to my attention when I went to the United Kingdom (my first trip abroad) back in 1995. Over there, TV is not censored, at least not to the degree that it is here. They leave in nudity, sex, profanity, and all the other stuff. There's very little protest about it because they have a much more mature attitude -- they believe that adults should be allowed to watch whatever they want to watch without having the government tell them whether or not it's OK for them. More importantly, they also believe that if there's a show that has sex, violence, profanity, or anything else they might happen to find offensive, the proper course of action is to change the channel or turn off the set, not to say that nobody else at all should be allowed to see that stuff on TV.
I wish we had that attitude here. As others have said, I find religious junk like "The 700 Club" highly offensive, but I simply don't watch it -- and I don't expect the government to ban it. People who want to see it should be allowed to without government interference, just as people who want to see "Die Hard" uncut should be allowed to without government interference as well.
I [...] am glad that the FCC is FINALLY cracking down. If you want profanity, you've got satellite, cable, or the video/DVD market. If if goes out over public airwaves, there should be restrictions; it is the law, after all....
C'mon. Mod me down and the parent up. Take 7 points away from me, but don't censor people's viewpoints just because they differ from yours.
How did your head not explode as you were writing that down?
Seriously, you post whines about moderation used to "censor" something you agree with AND clamours on about the holy righjeousness of using federal regulations to censor what YOU disagree with.
I think it should be illegal to be that contradictory.
You can't take the sky from me...
Profanity as a word only came into existence as a result of religion. Only one out of the four definitions for "profane" from dictionary.com did not have to do with the word "sacred."
Funny enough, profanity is really just something that is not religious. The FCC is profane, in this case.
I think that Washington D.C. is full of idiots.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
This is living proof that 50% of the population is of below average intelligence.
I'm dead serious when I say that too.
This kind of crap never made any sense to me when I was a kid, and it makes even less sense now. Who are these cretins who are so afraid of "bad words" anyway? What kind of bizarre "thoughts" go through their minds that would lead them to go as far as exerting political pressure on the government to protect them from these words?
I just don't get it. Even the "Its for the children!" argument doesn't hold water in my book. Kids need to be protected from many things, but words are not among them. Besides, if these words were truly evil or harmful in some way, they quite simply would have died out ages ago. No one would know them because our ancestors would have stopped using them. The very fact that they have persisted in our language proves that they are harmless. There is simply a legion of brain-dead morons who believe they are. The world would be a much better place if they didn't breed more of themselves.
You can mark this bullshit down under 'A' for absurd.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Right, as if that happened. This country needs to grow the fuck up. I'm certainly not a baby, the on/off switch and tuner knobs work on my radio/tv, and I certainly remember how to work them when I find content I consider disturbing. You figure that children aren't listening to his show as they should all either be under a parent's supervision or at school during his program.
You give these government assholes an inch, and they take a mile. Our basic freedoms are being eroded here and you're complaining about a hypothetical event. Howard has never waved his genitals in front of children and you're an idiot for saying such.
We need to realize what actually is and isn't a bad influence on everybody (face it, kids aren't the only ones to condone violence because they are over-exposed to it). Profanity only has power if we grant it power, and censoring it is the fastest way to do that. There's nothing wrong with saying "oh shit" if we say that there isn't, but murder is always wrong.
Basically, the FCC needs to censor and rate less on content and more on themes. Murder seems to be ok if you don't show the actual murder scene, and that just doesn't make sense. It works the same way for drug use, robbery, arsen, you name it.
I'd much prefer to walk down the halls of a high school and hear "fuck, that test was hard" than "Darn, that was a hard test, I'd like to kill Mr. Smith for giving it to us."
I'm all for in context swearing on television when they stipulate a disclaimer in advance. The worst thing is when a regular show comes on, and the context suddenly slips into profanity without warning.
How cute is it when a 3-year-old says, "This is fucking great" - and repeats it because of the exciting reaction culled from both sides. Look at the polarity (and sheer number) of posts here. That three-year-old gets all of it from the teenager laughing, "that's cool!", to the old lady, "my WORD!".
So what context does that child have for the proper use of words that create such polarity? I, as a parent, struggle with that.
Further, in school (no choice here, all US children must go to school), the kids curse - to eachother. If your child thinks it is "just fine" to curse to a teacher, your child will be punished. Is this censorship, too? Yes, perhaps it is. It also teaches the lesson that there are appropriate times, places and situations where cursing is acceptable (which is true in school, business, the courtroom and government). So, until everything comes into perfect alignment and there is no inappropriate time and place, at least tell me before cursing to my kids.
For the Superbowl, my kids did watch, and they never saw the nipple. If they did, they didn't see the nipple. Sure as hell though, they were grossly effected by it the next day. Because of the polarized REACTION to it. So now nudity is just a little more "cool", and a little more "accepted" - but sure as hell, I don't want my kids mooning the teacher, or a football stadium.
Why don't you move to China or N. Korea then? They very rigorously inforce these rules there. Nothing above the state after all, n'est pas? France might be up your alley too, but they aren't quite as disciplined as the other nations yet, but they're getting there.
...but Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell can blame atheists for 9/11. TV Christians can scream at us and tell us we're going to hell. Our own leaders can tell us we don't deserve to be citizens because we don't buy the Buy-Bull(tm).
Of course. Better our leaders do anything they want in the 'name of God', rather than being accountable to the public. The original poster didn't say, "Gee, I want to move to a totalitarian country!", he said, "I'm fucking tired of all of these religious wackos pushing their views on me!"
Big difference. Yet, I'd say 90% of the time someone complains about the growing problem with religion in the US, they are told to go to China. Then again, this is consistent with my experiences in dealing with rabid Christians -- they're nice only to people just like them, and want everyone else dead. Anyone who disagrees with the way Americans do things should get the hell out.
BTW, if you want to stay in the US (if you're in the US in the first place), you've got a remote; use it for crying out loud!!
Can't use a remote to change judicial proceedings where you are forced to 'swear in' on a Bible. Can't use a remote to stop hate crimes against the non-religious. Can't use a remote to keep our government from throwing science out of schools in favor of old sheepherder fairy-tales.
This is a free country.
Tell that to a black man living in Alabama today. Tell that to the gays living in the bible belt who can't come out for fear of being beaten to death. Tell that to the 'war criminals' being held in secret because they had the wrong headgear.
if you've got some money, you can even start up your own athiest advocacy cabel and/or broadcast channel, do fund raisers, form stupid talk shows and advocate religous intolerance to your heart's content
There are atheist advocacy groups, only they don't get the same protection under the law as religious advocacy groups. They also don't get the favoritism shown towards religious groups; you'll find bible clubs in many high schools, but many 'alternative religion' or freethinker clubs aren't allowed because they're 'religious'.
(so long as it isn't blatently hateful speech).
Seriously, get a grip. BTW, I'm somewhat of an agnostic and totally disagree with you if it wasn't obvious by now.
You're also apparently living in a cave. The parent poster has some very valid points, and some of us non-religious types are very fucking scared about the way our country is turning. Being an atheist outside of a few select areas is, in the US, a dangerous thing, and that goes tenfold if you're at all vocal.
--
I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy
Agreed. The most obscene speech lately is that coming out of Michael Powell's mouth. Instead of legilating and fining these things out of existence, parents should be teaching their children how to deal with it, typically by changing the station. This nation wants to blame society every time something goes wrong and then try to 'fix' society. It's always the wrong fix. If you're worried about what the children can see and be affected, start with the people who control those things--parents. And not by legislating the fix. By smacking them in the head every time they want the government to raise their kids for them.
Our founding fathers removed the guys in charge. Be American. Vote incumbents out.