F word on the Grammy

[TheBigA]

Instead, you've got a patchwork of court decisions and FCC precedent, and at the moment much of it is in federal court being challenged, largely in an attempt by broadcasters to establish some clearer guidelines under which to operate.

Which is why the courts keep dismissing FCC fines, like the one against CBS for the Janet Jackson wardribe malfunction. They use one of my favorite words to describe the current guidelines: Capricious. Love that word.

 

[mleach]

It would be nice if it were that simple. But it's not.

"The law" as it concerns acceptable language on broadcast radio and TV is hazy at best. You can search Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations (the section that contains the FCC's rules) all you want, and you won't find a clear set of standards as to what constitutes "obscene" or "indecent," how fines are to be imposed, and how large those fines are to be.

Instead, you've got a patchwork of court decisions and FCC precedent, and at the moment much of it is in federal court being challenged, largely in an attempt by broadcasters to establish some clearer guidelines under which to operate.

"The law is the law?" Pray tell, which law?

Guess the explains how I heard the following on the radio here in Denver within the last week at work..

* "..you are such a BIG DICK.." ( 103.5 The FOX KRFX )
*...yeah yeah..suck my ass" ( KTCL Channel 93.3 )
*...."I am one horny mother bitch" (KDHT Hot 107.1 )

..well as long as they don't use the "f" word, guess its all "good" :

 

[quadraphonic]

Exactly. That's why conflating it with "free speech" and lots of other tangents doesn't really work.
In this case, it's about "the law is the law or it's not."

It would be nice if it were that simple. But it's not.

"The law" as it concerns acceptable language on broadcast radio and TV is hazy at best. You can search Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations (the section that contains the FCC's rules) all you want, and you won't find a clear set of standards as to what constitutes "obscene" or "indecent," how fines are to be imposed, and how large those fines are to be.

Instead, you've got a patchwork of court decisions and FCC precedent, and at the moment much of it is in federal court being challenged, largely in an attempt by broadcasters to establish some clearer guidelines under which to operate.

"The law is the law?" Pray tell, which law?

I meant The Law as in The People Who Make And Enforce The Laws, not a specific one.

The FCC doesn't enforce whatever laws there are about obscenity, because the idea of any sort of requirement has been conflated with many other issues. Like you said, if they had some more spelled-out laws, it would make it easier for them to know what to do, then they could say "You knew the rules beforehand" and fine whoever might break the rules.

I don't care either way if they let the F-word all over the tv, there's still ways to waste my time out there besides tv.

 

[mleach]

I don't care either way if they let the F-word all over the tv, there's still ways to waste my time out there besides tv.

If the FCC would say "do whatever you want..air porno, the "f" word...we just dont care..."....I doubt that very many TV stations would take the offer, Radio on the on the hand..I am not so sure.

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

If the FCC would say "do whatever you want"....I doubt many TV stations would take the offer, Radio on the othe hand..not so sure.

It's already this way on cable and satellite TV, as even basic channels with no over-air component (closed circuit satellite backhauls don't count) can theoretically air anything they want, from F-bombs to full nudity.

But...they don't, and even Comedy Central bleeps words on the early airings of "The Daily Show". There is no even potential FCC requirement that they do so, just the marketplace requirement of being a basic cable station.

 

[mleach]

If the FCC would say "do whatever you want"....I doubt many TV stations would take the offer, Radio on the othe hand..not so sure.

It's already this way on cable and satellite TV, as even basic channels with no over-air component (closed circuit satellite backhauls don't count) can theoretically air anything they want, from F-bombs to full nudity.

But...they don't, and even Comedy Central bleeps words on the early airings of "The Daily Show". There is no even potential FCC requirement that they do so, just the marketplace requirement of being a basic cable station.

This is called "playing it safe". Everyone is so concerned about upsetting the other for fear of getting sued. Say for example that you dont like the current "popular" look among guys who sport shaved heads, goatees, tatoos, and that cigar in their mouths. OK..but to make a claim like that online one would accuse you of "hating" those with cancer..such as those who DO shave their heads in support of those who suffer from cancer. What does one have to do with the other? Strange but check out sites like www.city-data.com and the thread about this. You will see what I mean.

 

[hubcity]

This is called "playing it safe". Everyone is so concerned about upsetting the other for fear of getting sued. Say for example that you dont like the current "popular" look among guys who sport shaved heads, goatees, tatoos, and that cigar in their mouths. OK..but to make a claim like that online one would accuse you of "hating" those with cancer..such as those who DO shave their heads in support of those who suffer from cancer. What does one have to do with the other? Strange but check out sites like www.city-data.com and the thread about this. You will see what I mean.

Actually, any media outlet you run attracts a certain audience, and that audience attracts a certain type of advertiser. Ultimately, your station lives and/or dies on the support of the advertisers. The issue of content only enters the picture to the extent that it affects that relationship; if your programming includes filth and advertisers go away, you won't broadcast filth for long.

For the Grammys, I don't think the FCC should be involved. I *do* think CBS should have done a better job making sure that fleeting expletives didn't go over the air, but the pop world is the pop world, these are records that sell, it's the Grammys' job to award that, and it's CBS's job to make sure its programming (Grammys or not) draw the audience the advertisers expect it to draw.

With almost a million more viewers for the Grammys than last year (source), I think CBS can safely ignore the whining on this message board. Given the FCC's track record on making language enforcement stick, they can probably ignore that, too.

 

[justpassingthough]

I think the air is essentially out of the tires on censoring the F word. For better or worse, its a social norm now, and having it censored on broadcasts aimed towards adults seems rather foolish.

I'm not saying it should be bandied about by every artist at the Grammys, but certainly there is a percentage of people who use it regularly as part of their speech, and just seems like we're going down the rabbit hole to try to stop something that most adults don't care about.

Since the Supreme Court tends to use "community standards" as a guideline for deciding what is and what is not obscenity, its arguable that the F word would no longer be considered offensive in many "communities" (not geographical, more in terms of demographics and lifestyle)

 

[TheBigA]

Since the Supreme Court tends to use "community standards" as a guideline for deciding what is and what is not obscenity, its arguable that the F word would no longer be considered offensive in many "communities" (not geographical, more in terms of demographics and lifestyle)

How much of your personal money would you be willing to risk on that? Because taking a case to the Supreme Court costs a pile. And there are lots of people who just want to create a stink about things like obsenity, regardless of what you think. Meanwhile the artist who says it on TV walks away with no responsibility or obligation, and the TV company is stuck paying the price.

 

[vchimpanzee]

It would be nice if it were that simple. But it's not.

"The law" as it concerns acceptable language on broadcast radio and TV is hazy at best. You can search Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations (the section that contains the FCC's rules) all you want, and you won't find a clear set of standards as to what constitutes "obscene" or "indecent," how fines are to be imposed, and how large those fines are to be.

Instead, you've got a patchwork of court decisions and FCC precedent, and at the moment much of it is in federal court being challenged, largely in an attempt by broadcasters to establish some clearer guidelines under which to operate.

"The law is the law?" Pray tell, which law?

Guess the explains how I heard the following on the radio here in Denver within the last week at work..

* "..you are such a BIG DICK.." ( 103.5 The FOX KRFX )
*...yeah yeah..suck my ass" ( KTCL Channel 93.3 )
*...."I am one horny mother bitch" (KDHT Hot 107.1 )

..well as long as they don't use the "f" word, guess its all "good" :

I watched "Schindler's List". Although the treatment of Jews was probably the most offensive thing about it, it did have the F-word 5 times, and 4 of those times were in one sentence. Language-wise, though, that movie was less offensive than a typical night of prime-time network TV.

 

[kilamanjero]

I'm surprised anyone with any sort of intelligence even watches the Grammy Awards anymore.

Call me old fashion, but when a song has to resort to profanity and calls for abusing women like they are pieces of meat, that's not music in my book.

Plus I'm sick of these 15 minute wonders and posers like Lady Gag-me and Justin Beaver.

With the exception of country music, the music industry has gone to hell in a handbasket.

Yep, you are old fashion because country music sounds like some bullsh*t as well these days...