shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
This is the best genuine, non-Onion news in years:
June 8, 2007, 7:09PM
Swearing contest: Ruling against FCC broadcast ban on fleeting expletives is a victory for free speech and common sense
The Federal Communications Commission's crusade against obscenity suffered a setback this week when a federal appeals court panel slapped down regulations mandating large fines for those who inadvertently broadcast cusswords.
In doing so, the judges injected a much-needed dose of reality into an issue blown out of proportion by such incidents as Janet Jackson's 2004 Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction and celebrity cursing at awards shows.
The three-judge panel in New York, by a 2-1 margin, found that the FCC had failed to constitutionally justify why it had decided to reverse previous policy and penalize networks for incidents involving brief, unplanned outbursts of profanity. Until now the agency had tolerated such unscripted violations of its decency rules. The court panel directed the FCC to rewrite the regulation, noting, "We are skeptical that the commission can provide a reasoned explanation for its 'fleeting expletive' regime that would pass constitutional muster."
Incidents cited in the case included the use of profanity by Cher and Nicole Ritchie on Fox Broadcasting's Billboard Music Awards, cursing by a character on NYPD Blue, and swearing by a Survivor contestant on CBS's The Early Show. Fox, CBS, NBC and ABC joined forces in filing the suit challenging the authority of the FCC to assess $325,000 fines for violators.
Although the Bush administration strongly supports the FCC crackdown, the court ruling cited a defense by the networks that both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had used obscenities in public.
(
)
Although the FCC sought to penalize broadcasters for expletives that make reference to sexual or excretory functions, the judges found that "in recent times even the top leaders of our country have used variants of these expletives in a manner that no reasonable person would believe referenced sexual or excretory organs or activities."
The FCC has also been inconsistent in its application of its obscenity regulations. For example, it allowed the broadcast of the film Saving Private Ryan, a Steven Spielberg production about D-Day, even though the film's characters repeatedly use obscenities. In that case, the FCC ruled that the expletives were integral to the artistic merits of the movie.
Considering that more than 80 percent of U.S. households receive their TV signals via cable, which is outside the regulatory reach of the FCC, the continuing efforts of the agency to impose restrictions on entertainment content are increasingly irrelevant.
Rather than relying on government censors, parents seeking to shield their children from shows containing language and behavior they find objectionable should utilize available cable technologies to block such transmissions to their home sets.
While broadcasters using public airwaves should respect the sensibilities of their viewers, they should not be subject to stiff government penalties for unscripted and fleeting incidents involving profanity.Although the Bush administration strongly supports the FCC crackdown, the court ruling cited a defense by the networks that both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had used obscenities in public.
June 8, 2007, 7:09PM
Swearing contest: Ruling against FCC broadcast ban on fleeting expletives is a victory for free speech and common sense
The Federal Communications Commission's crusade against obscenity suffered a setback this week when a federal appeals court panel slapped down regulations mandating large fines for those who inadvertently broadcast cusswords.
In doing so, the judges injected a much-needed dose of reality into an issue blown out of proportion by such incidents as Janet Jackson's 2004 Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction and celebrity cursing at awards shows.
The three-judge panel in New York, by a 2-1 margin, found that the FCC had failed to constitutionally justify why it had decided to reverse previous policy and penalize networks for incidents involving brief, unplanned outbursts of profanity. Until now the agency had tolerated such unscripted violations of its decency rules. The court panel directed the FCC to rewrite the regulation, noting, "We are skeptical that the commission can provide a reasoned explanation for its 'fleeting expletive' regime that would pass constitutional muster."
Incidents cited in the case included the use of profanity by Cher and Nicole Ritchie on Fox Broadcasting's Billboard Music Awards, cursing by a character on NYPD Blue, and swearing by a Survivor contestant on CBS's The Early Show. Fox, CBS, NBC and ABC joined forces in filing the suit challenging the authority of the FCC to assess $325,000 fines for violators.
Although the Bush administration strongly supports the FCC crackdown, the court ruling cited a defense by the networks that both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had used obscenities in public.
(
)Although the FCC sought to penalize broadcasters for expletives that make reference to sexual or excretory functions, the judges found that "in recent times even the top leaders of our country have used variants of these expletives in a manner that no reasonable person would believe referenced sexual or excretory organs or activities."
The FCC has also been inconsistent in its application of its obscenity regulations. For example, it allowed the broadcast of the film Saving Private Ryan, a Steven Spielberg production about D-Day, even though the film's characters repeatedly use obscenities. In that case, the FCC ruled that the expletives were integral to the artistic merits of the movie.
Considering that more than 80 percent of U.S. households receive their TV signals via cable, which is outside the regulatory reach of the FCC, the continuing efforts of the agency to impose restrictions on entertainment content are increasingly irrelevant.
Rather than relying on government censors, parents seeking to shield their children from shows containing language and behavior they find objectionable should utilize available cable technologies to block such transmissions to their home sets.
While broadcasters using public airwaves should respect the sensibilities of their viewers, they should not be subject to stiff government penalties for unscripted and fleeting incidents involving profanity.Although the Bush administration strongly supports the FCC crackdown, the court ruling cited a defense by the networks that both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had used obscenities in public.
