Damn
Unfortunately, but all too predictably, the Supreme Court has allowed the FCC to come down hard on broadcasters for even a single, fleeting, unplanned oath.
[Justice] Scalia, joined by his four conservative colleagues, said the FCC "could reasonably conclude that the pervasiveness of foul language, and the coarsening of public entertainment in other media" justified a stricter policy "so as to give conscientious parents a relatively safe haven for their children."
Oh really? So, in other words, if the rest of our society were simon-pure, then the FCC shouldn't be allowed to stop cursing on television.
(The decision is about a narrow question--there's a larger question about the reach of the First Amendment still to be considered, and based on what Justice Thomas wrote, it may be taken up by the Supreme Court relatively soon. Still, I'll believe it when I see it.)
posted by LAGuy @ 12:13 AM
3 Comments:
I don't know, I thought even Scalia in his opinion hinted the overall constitutionality was somethinng in question. This decisions just said that the FCC's decision to slam fleeting expletives was not arbitrary or capricious. We will get the fleeting nudity decision pretty soon here, and that will really signal where the S.Ct is headed.
On the bigger issue, I believe that broadcasters should be able to broadcast whatthey want. However I thing the law should require disclosure (ratings or something) so people have a choice of what they see. I also would favor a technological solution that could, for example, beep foul language at the television set level. I assume that if broadcasters can include in media the close-captioned text for those who want it, they could easily include a signal that would trigger a beep or mute when certain words were to be ushered. More difficult would be a way to edit out sex scenes from movies if home viewers wanted to skip those.
There is already an adequate technological device for home viewers to skip scenes or sounds they find objectionable.
The fleeting expletives that created these cases were not planned and shown live. And what is an expletive? "Damn"? "Son of a bitch"? "Jesus"? And so on.
Actual offensive scenes can't be cut, and blocking them out creates other problems.
I have enough trouble with ratings--but now that we have them, why is anyone whining? You've been warned, don't watch, or even lock it out for you kids.
As for an occasional oath, it's like real-life--sometimes you hear them. A system that heavily fines against them when there's already rules against them and there's no easy way to plan in advance to stop them without very heavy censorhip is what I'd call arbitrary and capricious.
Post a Comment
<< Home