Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
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.
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.
George Carlin said it all. Words are just words…
I have been reading Michael Palin's book on the Monty Python years, it was amazing to read that ABC did cut 22 minutes out of 90 minutes of Monty Python material. They even bleeped words like ‘Naughty Bits', in fact any reference to a bodily function, a risqué word or anything ‘to do with life' was expunged. So Python seus ABC for destroying their work. After negotiations ABC presents a new list with words to cut out of the program. Thirty-two proposed cuts with words like ‘Damned' was cut out twice and even the word ‘Bitch', to describe a female dog, had to go….
Ridiculous, when you consider it already had been aired without bleeps and cuts by PBS..
What is so wrong with words?
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)