« Faith Forum for Democrats | Main | Dr. Death Versus Christian Death »
June 5, 2007
Broadcasting the F-Word
A court rejects fines for indecent speech.
A federal appeals panel struck down Federal Communication Commission rules that regulate indecent speech broadcast on American airwaves. "If President Bush and Vice President Cheney can blurt out vulgar language, then the government cannot punish broadcast television stations for broadcasting the same words in similarly fleeting contexts," reports The New York Times. "Although the case was primarily concerned with what is known as "fleeting expletives," or blurted obscenities, on television, both network executives and top officials at the Federal Communications Commission said the opinion could gut the ability of the commission to regulate any speech on television or radio."
Naturally, the broadcasters are thrilled. "We are very pleased with the court's decision and continue to believe that the government regulation of content serves no purpose other than to chill artistic expression in violation of the First Amendment," said Scott Grogin, a senior vice president at Fox.
Comments
My 85-year-old mother, who annually gives $10 to the Republic Party, send a note with her last donation, warning that if President Bush uses the word "ass" again, this the last time they'll get anything from her.
Posted By: Alison | June 6, 2007 12:23 PM
The public, if they own the airwaves, certainly owns the US Senate floor too. If political leaders can say a naughty word with 0 consequences, the Judiciary is right to be reluctant to apply an increasingly draconian and arbitrary system of fines to broadcasters. Want to censor a broadcast? There's this button you have, called "off." It does not cost me any taxes, unlike the FCC...Think about using it, instead of advocating bigger government in practice while you *claim* to be for smaller government.
JMR
Posted By: sarcasmo | June 7, 2007 6:52 AM
Hark! The Fox Broadcasting Corporation, beloved by social conservatives, has announced that they are pleased about their continued freedom to broadcast obscenity. Will social conservatives do or say anything in response? No, because they're waiting for their marching orders from Dr. Dobson. In the meantime, they'll continue with their shopping, supporting all those sponsors of naughty-word programs. Duh!
Posted By: Patrick | June 8, 2007 4:21 PM
Brilliant! I love happenstances that pit social conservative values against traditional small-government conservatism.
Posted By: globalizati | June 13, 2007 1:04 AM
Is there no class left? My neighbouring Americans: This is not about big government. This is about a false notion of freedom. Please explain to me how being out of line with the freedom to serve God or being free to resort to a foul mouth because one has nothing better to say, can somehow benefit anyone? Are the ratings of broadcasters going to increase because they more frequently broadcast words from the those who truly have limited vocabulary. The limitation of freedom is not on the those who exercise enough self-control to refrain from resorting to a foul spirit. The limitation of freedom comes from those whose lives are so impoverished that they do not use their God-given intelligence to communicated with grace and dignity. Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." "[And] I am the way, the truth and the life."
(a Canadian)
Posted By: Mark Philip Venema | June 14, 2007 2:05 PM