The Federal Communications Commission, or "The Fun Police" for short, won a major bleeping victory this week when the Supreme Court ruled broadcast outlets that allow isolated or unscripted foul language on live programs may be punished by the FCC. According to the New York Times, the 5-4 decision was based on whether or not the Commission had provided an adequate explanation for reversing its longstanding policy against punishing outlets for "fleeting expletives."
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia claimed "the pervasiveness of foul language, and the coarsening of public entertainment in other media such as cable, justify more stringent regulation of broadcast programs so as to give conscientious parents a relatively safe haven for their children." This is an interesting position considering that the case stems out of two separate incidents, both broadcast on Fox on programs that weren't exactly promoted as being "family friendly" in the first place.
The first incident referenced in "Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations" involved Cher dropping an "F-Bomb" during an acceptance speech (link obviously NSFW) at the 2002 Billboard Music Awards; the second involved Nicole Richie's vulgar description of cow manure during an exchange with Paris Hilton at the 2003 Billboard Awards. So let us just recap for a moment here: Justice Scalia is upset that two programs, featuring this woman and a hotel heiress best known for a homemade sex tape, were not safe viewing for children. For Justice Scalia's sake, it would probably be best if he didn't plop his grandchildren down in front of HBO on a Sunday night expecting to see "Seventh Heaven."
In 2002 and 2003, when the incidents occurred, Fox was protected under the FCC's "fleeting expletives" policy. It was understood that the programs were live and unscripted and that any expletives that may be said would not be the fault of the network. Fox would have been safe too, if it weren't for Janet Jackson that is. In the wake of Jackson's infamous "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl, the FCC reversed the "fleeting expletives" policy in 2006 and made it be known that any more Cher-like outbursts would be met with swift punishment. The New York federal appeals court ruled the next year that the FCC did not offer adequate explanation for its policy change, but this week that decision was reversed.
Again, let us recap what we have learned so far: The Supreme Court has ruled that music industry award shows, those conventions of squeaky clean living, should be child friendly viewing. Meanwhile the FCC is reversing longstanding policies and practices based on Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake. That is your tax dollars at work, ladies and gentlemen.
Justice John Paul Stevens, trying in vain to present some level of sanity, disagreed with Scalia's insistence that Cher and Richie's comments were literally referring to sexual intercourse or excrement. "As any golfer who has watched his partner shank a short approach knows," Stevens wrote in his dissenting opinion, "it would be absurd to accept the suggestion that the resultant four-letter word uttered on the golf course describes sex or excrement and is therefore indecent." Of course accepting Stevens' premise would be accepting the existence of nuance, something Scalia has never really embraced.
Andrew Jay Schwartzman, of the Media Access Project, blasted the court's decision. "Writers, artists and directors on the front lines of the First Amendment face continuing pressure to err on the side of blandness," Schwartzman told Reuters. Well gosh-darn it Andrew, what the heck is wrong with some blandness?
While Justice Scalia's claim that there should be a safe haven for children and families on broadcast television is not without merit, it does not mean that all broadcast programs are required to be family friendly at all times. It is completely reasonable that some folks find Cher's remarks to be offensive, but is it not just as plausible that others might find the obsession of network news with the most violent or grisly of stories (Laci Peterson, anyone?) to be just as offensive? Meanwhile it is the awards show that is held to a higher standard of decency than the newscast. Of those two broadcasts, which is the one that can more aptly be described as "educational" programming and therefore obligated to be somewhat family friendly? Chances are it isn't the one with Paris Hilton. This probably isn't the last we will hear of this story, but we'll make sure to tell you to get the kids out of the room the next time it comes up.
Somebody's getting shocked
Also Interesting:
Get our Newsletter!
Click here to sign up and stay informed
