Court partly upholds “dirty words†ban. «Splitting 5-4, the Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the government's power under existing law to ban the use on radio and TV of even a single four-letter word that is considered indecent — but left open the question of whether the ban might violate the First Amendment, at least in some situations. The Court, in an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, said the Federal Communications Commission's switch in policy to ban even a fleeting use of such a word was “entirely rational†under the law that governs federal administrative powers. The ruling came in FCC v. Fox Television Stations, et al. (07-582). » More analysis.
"What The F-word? The decision is such a crock of S-word." 😉
I realize this forum does not ban these words totally. But, the sentiment of the above statement does seem to be consistent with the restrictions on their use that do exist.
Emmett
I've always felt like I was missing something in this ongoing debate. When I think of the First Amendment, I'm not thinking of my right to say "dirty words" or get naked on camera on the public airwaves between the hours of 6am to 10pm. If I want, or need, to do that, I'll do it between 10pm and 6am, or I'll do it on cable, or Youtube. The discussion board for Way With Words has decency guidelines, though it's not required by law. Can you imagine what the soaps would be like, or The Jerry Springer Show, without some decency guidelines?
And still there are so many even more offensive or mature nonverbal plot pivots, and little control over them. I for one would rather hear an occasional S- and even F-word than to be urged to laugh in prime time as a not-yet-divorced man romances and impregnates his best friend's wife only to discover his son is also sleeping with her son and his wife was once a man and the priest who fondled his younger brother in the vestry — all good naturedly performed without a single obscene word.
I think young children are better able to approach the issue of obscene language than complex issues of sexuality. Yet much prime-time programming exposes them to, and even makes light of, that which is most confusing, while protecting them from what is quite routine.
Such laws highlight our government's impotence in attempting to use legislation to substitute for genuine morality.
I have a hard time swallowing morality lessons from many legislators, anyway. I suppose their interest in words stems from the uncanny watchfulness they must exercise over their own words. It seems their self-control is often sadly lopsided.
Well, Glenn, you make a good point there. I don't mean to pick on Jerry Springer again, but the topics are over the top, and who are we kidding with all the bleeped-out expletives?