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."
whether or not it has anything to do with sex or excretion, is 'profane.'
;)
holy fucking shit
Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
From now on, I will use the word FCC as my favourite swear word.
Here's an example: "This is FCCing brilliant!"
I'll let you guess the exact pronunciation.
-
... with the Second.
A housemate of mine used to love that expression. Only guy I knew who was a card-carrying member of both the ACLU and the NRA.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
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.
Physicists get Hadrons!
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
The Passion of the Stern lives on!
... almost anything goes. Maybe we're more open minded. Maybe we're a little less uptight. Maybe we watch a little too much American TV.
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?"
> My analysis
BZZZZZZT!!!
The word "analysis" contains ANAL.
Therefore the word "analysis", "analyst" and derivatives have been declared indecent & profane and shall be removed from the English language forthwith.
- by Ruling of the FCC
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.
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.'
Although I count as the last person to accuse a government agency of using logic, by that new definition, Bono's statement may not count as either indecent or profane...
The new criterion includes "grossly offensive". I do not consider "this is fucking brilliant" the least bit offensive, nevermind "grossly".
Of course, I find very little offensive enough to warrant complaining - I may not control the content, but I control the TV itself. I can change channels, or even just turn it off. IMO, the FCC needs such a major overhaul we may have an easier time just dissolving it and creating a new agency, perferable with control ONLY, over spectrum allocation, not content.
I never did understand how limiting content fails to violate the 1st amendment, but hey, what do I know? "no law respecting an establishment of religion" doesn't include giving my tax dollars to the 700 club; "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" doesn't mean people can have guns; "unreasonable searches and seizures" doesn't include FBI backdoors into every ISP; "without due process of law", "in all criminal prosecutions", and "a speedy and public trial" doesn't include anyone accused of terrorism or "unlawful combatants"; "cruel and unusual punishments" doesn't include sleep deprivation, inedibly bland food, or blasting Bruce Springsteen at high volume; and "shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" and "reserved to the states respectively, or to the people" doesn't mean anything.
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.
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.
Guess that means we won't be seeing gems like this anymore....
KYLE: Shut-up, fatboy!
CARTMAN: Hey! Don't call me fat, you fuckin' Jew!
MR. GARRISON: Eric! Did you just say the F-word?
CARTMAN: "Jew"?
KYLE: No, he's talkin' about "fuck." You can't say "fuck" in school, you fuckin' fatass.
MR. GARRISON: Kyle!
CARTMAN: Why the fuck not?
MR. GARRISON: Eric!
STAN: Dude, you just said "fuck" again!
MR. GARRISON: Stanley!
KENNY: Fuck.
MR. GARRISON: Kenny!
CARTMAN: What's the big deal? It doesn't hurt anybody. Fuck fuckity fuck fuck fuck.
MR. GARRISON: How would you like to go see the school counselor?
CARTMAN: How would you like to suck my balls?
KIDS: [gasping]
MR. GARRISON: What did you say?
CARTMAN: Oh, I-I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Actually, what I said was: [speaking through bullhorn] "How would you like, to suck my balls, Mr. Garrison?"
KYLE: Holy shit, dude.
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
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...
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.
Why's it OK to show people getting shot, robbing banks, beating each other up, etc; while everyday ordanary dialog is being censored.
I'd much rather my kid was exposed to a handful of swearwords and see the occasional brest, then be shown TV shows that makes them think everyone's a criminal so it must be OK.
Movie dialog like threats like "I'm going to kill you" are far more harmful to kids than "oh shit".
How about a law:
The US has more freedom of speech than anywhere else in the world, ever. That's because the First Amendment to the Constitition guarantees it.
The only exception is the things you're not allowed to say. But such a limitation is a small price to pay for unlimited freedom of speech!
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.