Here we go again.
This is not the first time we’ve addressed the issue of profanity on the airwaves, nor will it be the last. But it’s worth bringing up again, because this week, the US Supreme Court is reviewing broadcasting indecency standards for the first time in 30 years.
Who are the culprits here? Bono, for one, who casually dropped the F-word at the 2003 Golden Globes; Cher said the same at the 2002 Billboard Music Awards (pictured, left); Nicole Richie double-fisting both the F- and S-words at the 2003 Billboards (pictured); System of a Down delivering an enthusiastically unbleeped "F— yeah!" on SNL; more recently, Diane Keaton and the F-bomb on Good Morning America; and, of course, the grand mammary (sorry!) of all obscene blunders, Janet Jackson and Boobgate at the 2004 Super Bowl.
Much like it was 30 years ago, the Court seems divided over theissue, with Justice Scalia blaming television for "coarsening" publicdiscourse and Justice Ginsberg saying there "seems to be no rhyme orreason" for some of the FCC’s decisions, such as allowing thetelevision broadcast of the movie Saving Private Ryan, even though it contains expletives.
After much heated debate, this will likely boil down to the issue of"fleeting expletives," as opposed to dirty language on scripted showsor the broadcast of movies, because the networks know better than tomonkey around with the FCC bylaws when children might be watching (theissue of Saving Private Ryan being an obvious, if curious, exception). So, what to do about these once-a-year (or thereabouts) goofs?
In my opinion? Nothing. People have been using questionable language in public forums since, well, Biblical times, according to some folks.(If anything, it’s when the media runs with the story that "offensive"language gets maximum exposure.) In 1978, when George Carlin deliveredhis pointed ”Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television” routine, itsparked a narrow 5–4 Supreme Court decision in the favor of thegovernment’s power to regulate indecent material on the publicairwaves. Because of that decision, broadcasters can be fined more than$325,000 for a single utterance of the F-word, even if it is said by aguest on a live show. So we do have a system in place, and asimperfect as it may be, it keeps raw discourse to a minimum and givesthe networks the creative space to do what they do best — keep usinformed and keep us entertained.
But what do you think? Do we need more stringent laws and strictercensorship of the airwaves? Or is a goof now and again the price we payfor the freedom of speech?
Comments (1-30) of 74 Add your comment
World Champions! World F***ing Champions!
I’m no prude but I detest the F word. Kids are learning about this word too young. Bad language should be curtailed at least til after prime time and kids are in bed asleep.
If you don’t want your kids to see shows you don’t approve of or to hear words you don’t enjoy…then parent them. Set up your V-Chip, use parental controls on the television, and…god forbid…be around your children more and get to know what they are watching. You’d be surprised at what kind of innuendos can be slipped into a TV-PG show. Heck, look at Shrek…that was filled with tons of dirty comments that mostly went over children’s heads. The bottom line is these words don’t hurt anyone. Sex, violence, and cursing are all parts of real life that are expressed on television as an imitation. When I watch The Shield (without my kids) I feel like I’m actually part of this rough police unit. If someone was to utter, “Oh my golly gosh! What the heck is that?” I would probably stop watching. I don’t NEED the cursing, but it adds to the realism of the show. Don’t censor America just because parents don’t know how to parent their kids.
Apparently they aren’t parents.
People are always saying, “Hey, it’s out there, so what’s the deal?” Yeah it is. And one of the reasons is due to the fact kids grow up with it, especially in the entertainment world. Let’s have some areas where we don’t have to be around it. Is church the only place left where we don’t have to put up with it anymore?
It just shows the lack of class and limited vocabulary of these individuals. There is never an occasion where this is appropriate.
I’m sorry, but if you don’t want your kids to hear these words you might want to keep them in the house away from all the windows and televisions. In Boston, someone complained about the Zack and Miri poster because of the word Porno. Walk through Boston Common and listen to the homeless people doing drugs and yelling, then tell me you wouldn’t rather explain to your kid what porno is. Don’t censor society, talk to your kids.
Kids are learning about this word too young.
You’re going to have to censor school if you don’t want kids to hear curse words. Or maybe realize that dirty words, while not appropriate at dinner or church, will always be part of the vernacular, and can be used to effectively make a point, add umph to a joke, and increase the potency of the statement it’s utterred in.
When was the last time any of the protective and nieve parents walked around the malls, school hallways or playground. I’m sure you would be suprised with the profane vocabulary our children are speaking and what they are around everyday anyway. As mentioned before “ITS CALL PARENTING” as the “PARENT” it is your job to teach them what you view as being right from wrong any. So do you part as a “PARENT” take “YOUR PARENTING RESPONSIBILITY” seriously.
I find it funny Saving Private Ryan was listed because of the swearing, as opposed to the cringe inducing violence during the D-Day invasion. Same with Zack and Miri poster, because of the word porno (as opposed to the visually impressive but harrowing Saw posters). Note the Supreme Court not once mentioned anything relating to extreme acts of violence being portrayed, and it’s being projected on some of the viewing public. Even some responders of the Dexter and True Blood EW reviews complained about the sex and swearing more than the violence. In the videogame realm, I even remember some gamers being concerned about buying Gears of War because of the rampant profanity, instead of the ability to hack someone apart with a chainsaw and see their insides once the job is done. Oh and don’t even get me started about how same-sex characters ruins the ’sacredness’ of primetime TV.
It really shows how misguided this country’s principles get. I don’t support the Supreme Court at all.
With shows like Special Victims Unit and CSI quite popular, it’s unclear to me why language is such a controversy. You can have a drama that centers around child-rape and murder, yet people are up in arms because of something Paris Hilton said? This is ridiculous.
Censorship is the job of parents, not the state. I need my government to build roads, protect me from invasion, and provide me key opportunities such as education; I can control my T.V and children on my own. I am upset that my tax dollars, which could have gone to deal with a real problem (unemployment, war, houseless-ness, etc…), are mired in a problem that can fixed by a couple of triple-A batteries and a polymer coated IR/RF transmitter.
When my children hear words that they do not understand, I teach them about the use or abuse of these terms. Hiding obscenity beneath a thin veil of TV broadcast rules does not stop children from learning or using these terms. I think some are oblivious to how our children really speak when adults are not immediately visible. If you want your children not to use these terms: educate; not insulate. Ultimately, when the cool kid at school drops an F-Bomb on the play ground the impact is orders of magnitude greater than that of hearing a stranger
F*** it.
It’s hilarious to me when prudes complain about nudity or profanity on a show when odds are they’re watching that show on cable or satellite, both of which use encryption technology and incorporate parental controls into their equipment. If you pay to watch an encryptd network you’re tacitly agreeing to their content, and therefore have zero right to complain about it. Also, every tv produced since ‘92 has a V Chip in it, if you don’t like the content of a particular show all you have to do is set a rating ceiling. If you’re complaining about what others watch on the lameassed pretext that you’re trying to “protect the innocent” then you need to just get a life and mind your own damned business.
Goofs are the price we pay.
If I have to listen to commercials about erectile disfunction, vaginal dryness, his and hers KY, and cleansing one’s colon, what is the point in worrying about a few swear words???
Language belongs to the people, not the government. It is to the people that the responsibility rests. If a viewer is offended by a broadcast, that viewer can boycott the show or network, or better yet, change the channel.
In many of these cases, people complain about shows they aren’t even watching. Government needs to stay out of the daily lives of people as much as possible. And last I checked, nobody is forcing anybody to watch.
A person should worry more about what he/she watches, rather than what other people are watching. Which begs the question of: If you are, then why are you watching in the first place? And if that person can in fact manage to manage him/her self, then it’s only one more step to realize that the TV has an off button. There’s probably still a few witches, or at least books, they can burn to pass the time.
Greg
http://gregbecerra.blogspot.com/
My theory on the foul language vs. violence debate is that kids are more prone to use curse words after hearing them than committing a violent act after watching it on tv. But I do think it is ridiculous to condmen one and not the other.
In regards to the fines, here is an idea: instead of fining the networks who are not always able to control what happens at live events (award shows and such) why not fine the individual who uttered the expletives. Making people being held accountable for their actions, what a concept.
Sorry for the typo; that should read condemn.
I don’t really care about the violence on TV but for educational reasons swear words should be censored. There are so many words out there that could be used instead and it wouldn’t hurt to widen people’s vocabulary. Plus they are just not nice. If all you have to say is a swear word then maybe you should go get a thesaurus.
uh……
uh…….
I wish we could count on all adults to be responsible and properly parent their children, but lets face it, many parents aren’t doing their job these days. So it isn’t just a matter of “don’t like it? don’t watch it.” Many parents don’t care what their kids watch. Lets at least reserve SOME form of decency in the media, to aid in the positive protection of what comes into the home whether some adult is monitoring or not.
Words are words. It is the intent behind them that matters. When I was a child, I was allowed to watch horror movies. I had nightmeres about them. It’s the violence I remember, not the language. Sure, some parents allow the TV to be a babysitter. Sometimes you can’t change the channel before a child hears a swear word. But that is when you sit down and speak to your child about what is right to say and when. I don’t think violence should be a common place thing in our society. That’s what worries me. When my kid says the f-word? We’ll talk about it then. Parents are the ultimate censors, as it should be.
Is this the biggest issue in America? Does the Supreme Court really need to waste it’s time on swear words? My kids are exposed to swear workds and know it is wrong to use them. In real life adults use “bad” words, even if it is when you stub your toe, who cares?! It is not the FCC’s job or right to dictate what I can hear or what my children can hear. If you don’t like what you hear on tv, then read a book!
The government should regulate it. Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile and push to see how far they can take censorship. What’s next, obscene words plaguing the news? There needs to be limits. A person should be able to control what their child hears within their own home. Yes, they can put warnings on shows that contain that kind of content and a parent has the option of whether they want their child to watch/hear it, but the line has to be drawn when it concerns live shows.
People ought to be more concerned about all the teenage sexualty and all the violence shown on television.
Censored Freedom is not Freedom at all.
I agree that it’s when the media runs with the story it becomes a big deal. I remember watching the 2004 Superbowl and seeing Boobgate happen so quickly I wasn’t sure it actually did, and then I forgot about it until everyone started saying how scandalous it was. People made it a bigger deal than it was because it happened so fast you couldn’t see anything.
Well obviously, hearing dirty words will inevitably warp childrens’ minds and make them want to do drugs and disagree with their parents. Dirty words equal anarchy. If we want to be safe, we better keep these dangerous words away from children at all costs. We should also keep comprehensive sex education away from them. While we’re at it, let’s ban bilingual education. If there’s one thing we know, it’s that once a child realizes that some words are bad just because society says so, no matter what the context, then they become social delinquents.
Children can be taught not to say swear words and to even avoid them when they are used. Having the government regulate the use of foul language, doesn’t teach your children a thing. Take responsibility and make an effort to set your own kids straight. Letting the government limit our freedom of speech, lets them remove our freedoms. If it comes down to local television no foul language and cable having foul language then fine. I can limit and restrict my kids from viewing tv as much as I wish. Mostly because me and my wife take great efforts not to substitute our time with them with TV. It can be hard yes, but it can be done.