That’s “fleeting” expletives, and the Supreme Court agreed on Monday (March 17) to hear arguments over the FCC’s policy regarding those slips of the tongue (see related article). The case revolves around two incidents during the Billboard Music Awards in which Cher (in 2002) and Nicole Richie (in 2003) used profanity.
The FCC applauded the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case. Fox Broadcasting (responsible for airing the Billboard Music Awards) said the case will allow them “to argue that the FCC’s expanded enforcement of the indecency law is unconstitutional in today’s diverse media marketplace, where parents have access to a variety of tools to monitor their children’s television viewing.” But Parents Television Council President Tim Winter argues, “Such harsh, unedited profanity is unacceptable for broadcast over the publicly owned airwaves when children are likely to be watching.”
How far do you think our high court will go in this case? Do you think it should give the FCC more power to police profanity?
Posts
29 comments:
Your title is f***ing brilliant!
In my current classes we have been discussing these cases and I have already stated my side.
I don't feel that they should be allowed to say those words on broadcast television. I also believe they should be fined and all the money collected should be used in the Universal Fund or something.
I mean seriously how hard to refrain from saying curse words. I do it all the time, in fact the 10 main words in my 100 word vocabulary are cuss words, but I don't use them in front of children, or in professional situations. To me, the Grammys, Golden Globes, and other awards ceremonies are supposed to be professional. I am very confused how people thing that it is alright, for a star to get on these public airwaves and cuss. Also for anyone that does believe this is o.k., would you let me stand in front of your child or close family members and tell them a story using some of my lower-ended vocabulary words, and at the end say oh sorry, "that was a mistake".
I know for a fact, that if I make a mistake, I get no special treatment. If the rule states that there shouldn't be words of sexual, or excretory activities, and organs. I think they should change it for the snobby rich people, that believe they are allowed to do anything, such as Bono (i used it as an adjective), or Cher & Richie, (oh, it was a mistake). They should put it as "no cuss words PERIOD on broadcast television". I feel that people that are worth big amounts of money feel they can do anything they want, and that attitude will be the downfall to America in general in the future years.
FRED CARLEY MCNNM 101
correction
FRED CARLEY MCCNM101
I want to start by stating that I don’t feel that children should be constantly exposed to vulgar language, but I don’t think that the networks should be too heavily punished when accidental or inadvertent obscenities are aired during award shows. I suppose my tolerance for obscenities could be attributed to my youngish age, but I feel that our media and society as a whole should be moving away from censorship in general. Not that I feel that major the broadcast networks deserve extra breaks or benefits, but it does seem like the inconsistent FCC standards makes the punishments unfair and arbitrary.
-Ryan McCardell (MCCNM 101 Ebersole Tues.-Thurs. 9:30)
“Give me liberty or give me death, but don’t forget to protect and educate my children, because I’ll be watching TV, while helping the less fortunate or lazy, through welfare, and making sure I have something to retire on since I won’t save enough on my own.” Yep, that’s what I hear from people today. People want their freedom but aren’t willing to work to keep it. Leave the fuc*ing broadcasting companies alone.
With short-minded topics like this, it makes me wonder why we have a Supreme Court. What percentage of Americans use profanity? According to most of what I read, 60 to 70 percent, but I don’t believe everything I read. So, if the majority of people use profanity, what’s the frickin problem? These rules are only going to “protect” a very small percentage of children who have never heard or used profanity. Personally, I’m guessing that any child that hasn’t heard or used profanity is either too young to watch award shows or is secluded by a much larger barrier than the FCC could ever enforce.
Besides, if the FCC is going to fine NBC for Bono’s language then NBC should be smart enough to have a line in the contract stipulating that any foul language or indecency on the part of the contract signer will result in a penalty as large, or larger, than the FCC fine. Any questions?
I personally believe that cursing especially on broadcast television where it can be heard by the public should not be allowed. Public tv and events are no longer appropriate for a family with children. You can't go to a athletic competition without having some drunk screaming expletives at the refs or competing teams. And shows on broadcast television are more sexual, they show drinking and cursing, and focus on looking good to maintain power. And those who look good shouldn't have the power to get away with cursing on public airwaves. I don't know how far the courts will go but it should definitly be corrected.
I feel that the fcc should not gain any more power that it has over networks with the supervision of the content the network shows. I think that the main argument that kids will hear a curse word here and there is not that big of a deal. There is a lot more that can harm a child than a curse word that Nicole Richie says. Things like reality violence, racism, sexism, stupidity, death, and rape are more likley to harm a child than a curse word that they already heard from both their parents and at school. Me personaly, I heard more cursing at school, home, and the general public than on live television or television at that. Though I hope not I believe that this will become a priority in the courts and be considered to grant the FCC more power to control content. I believe that it is unconstitutional and unfair to networks for unexpected or fleeting expletives. I feel that the Supreme Court should have more important things to consider than cursing on television. In a similar event, singer Bono used a fleeting expletive when he accepted an award and his thoughts were that it was F***ing briliant. He has sold over 100 million albums around the world, so he said that sonmething was F***ing briliant it probably is.
Posted By: Mario Balinton, April 10 2008
I do not feel networks should be so extensively punished for some minor slips ups, especially during an awards show ( a live program).
In a sense "shit happens" and often times such instances cannot be controlled.
I also feel that a lot of children are exposed to such obscenities, minor and extreme in daily life. When they hear it on TV there is a different context about what is said. What I mean is, often times to a young child TV land is like fantasy land (at least it was for me, I had it set firmly in my mind that TV programs were fictional).
ALSO, if parents are doing their jobs well, the child will be able to hear an obscenity and have the sense to know it is wrong and should not be repeated.
~Niki Sosa: MCCNM 101 Ebersole Tues.-Thurs. 9:30am
I don’t think the Supreme Court should be dealing with this case. Profanity on TV is not considerably important because profanity is a part of American culture. I think the FCC should not be granted more power to police profanity. Nicole Richie participates in TV shows that edit the content she provides and musicians have edited music, but the only reason the Billboard Music Awards exists is because of the musicians and celebrities. More importantly, the real question is, “why do parents shield their children from profanity when it is such a huge part of American culture? (especially in American entertainment).Children will be exposed to it sooner rather than later. Why does profanity have to be edited and labeled “taboo”? Bottom line: profanity is a part of American culture, which includes music, movies, and television. There for, the Billboard Music Awards is entirely for the purpose of honoring the people that are cultural symbols of the entertainment industry and they do often use profanity.
Joann Babbitt MCCNM 101
The concept of people having to the think they need to cuss let alone on T.V. is dumb. Why do you need to do it? I really don't feel that anyone ,regardless of how much money you have or who you are, should be allowed to cuss on T.V. when they know that others will be watching. Having respect for ourselves and for others is always a great quality to have so why do want to mess it up with cussing? The FCC does need to have control of the cussing because if not then who and what will society think if people are just allowed to do what they please when it comes to there language?
Sarah Duncan Feature writing
I can't help but think censorship wouldn't be nearly as controversial as it is if people wouldn't make such a colossal deal out of minor "accidents" made during live television events. Granted, Nicole Richie and Cher's uses of profanity were nothing but classless attempts at seeming "edgy," and they should be reprimanded for such behavior. Nonetheless, both of those instances lasted for mere seconds in time, but the reliving of these moments through mass media fueled by public uproar exposes us to such profanity even more. This is the case with all miniscule public obscenities. The media and the public fall into a frenzy concerning the corruption of our youth through these random cases of uncensored profanity, claiming that hearing such horrendous obscenities will ultimately result in the demise of our childrens' future and integrity (well, maybe not that dramatic, but something along those lines). However, excessive focus on the evils of Cher and Nicole Richie's bad mouths, or even Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" just exposes children to these mishaps even more. I don't think these cases have actually offended anybody, but instead, I think it's a prime example of the idea that bad news is good news.
As far as the FCC's handling of these cases regarding the Billboard Music Awards goes, I honestly don't think that there's much needing to be done or fixed about the situation. Furthering laws regarding censorship seems unnecessary, as these acts of uncensored obscenities are rare enough.
-Danielle Pollack
Mass Communications 101
I think that cussing and minor slips should be allowed on television as long as the viewers are advised. A cuss word here and their should really be the least of our worries that kids will see. We should be more concerned about the other issue on tv our kids see such as war, sex, and the commercials about the ideal image. In the case of CHer and Nicole, I dont think they should be punished or fines for their use of profanity. CHildren are exposed to profanity in the real world daily, its your job as a parent to a make them understand whats right and wrong.
I feel that there should still be accountability for broadcasters and the content they provide. This is especially true for local broadcast channels and even radio. It may seem a little harsh for stations to be fined upwards of a quarter million dollars, but if no preventitive measures are taken, then there will be no decency left on television. The stipulations for cable, which are less restricted is rightfully so. I feel that children can be much more easily prohibited from certain programming that is in the parents hands to decide what is suitable content for their children, however on local broadcast channels it is much harder to do so and needs to be enforced to ensure that parents and children alike are not stunned at an awkward crossroads due to primetime content on family programming... Blair Cooper
When I first saw the title I thought it was a curse word, but then when the article said the word was fleeting, I thought it was straight up genius. The title matched the article because the article talks about cursing and some famous singers who let curse words slip in their music or on television. I don't think that parents need worry about their children hearing curse words. Most media such as television and radio bleep curse words out. I learned curse words from my parents before I ever listened to music that contained curse words. I think the curse words should just be spoken because most people that watch shows that contain curse words already know what the bleeped out words are anyway.
Posted By
Jessica Brown
When it comes to any curse words, including the F-bomb, I believe that no matter what you do, the kids are going to hear it. They may here it at school, on television, or sitting at home with their parents or siblings. Whether the children repeat it or not is in the matter of discipline.
I do not believe that the Supreme Court should give the FCC the right to crackdown on “fleeting expletives.” There are already regulations based on broadcast television and indecency. If it has not put a complete stop to it, than no matter what, it will continue to happen. The FCC cannot just run around trying to control absolutely everything. This generation likes to be shocked. Seeing Janet’s breast and hearing Bono curse is shocking, and entertaining.
Bono is probably one of the most influential musical artists worldwide, and if he says something is “…is really, really f---ing brilliant,” than honestly, it probably is really f---ing brilliant. And for those people who believe that by using the f-word that he is showing he has less vocabulary and lacks intelligence then so be it. Bono does not need anybody telling him that he is lesser of an intellectual being because he said the f-word. We all know Bono is a smart and decent man.
I am a firm believer in not covering up issues or sweeping them under the rug to act like they do not exist. The word FUCK exists people, and is used every day in almost every context! Your kids are going to be exposed to it and probably say it when you are not around anyway. Parents are better of letting adolescents hear the word on television and then explaining that is a word to be used only by adults than trying to cover it up or hide it, and the FCC should not either
I think that since these people that are using this language on national tv are professionals and know what they are doing when they say the foul words, they should be fined a small amount of money. because a lot of people look up to these people and by them seeing their romodel use that language on tv, they will think its ok, such as little kids. so i believe they should be fined a little bit of money for them not being as professional as they should be.
I agree with what one person wrote,"children shouldn't be exposed to vulgar language" point blank period. that to me is just unacceptable. parents now days have all the right equipment to block pretty much anything and everything they prefer there children not see or hear. what I have a problem with is that you don't want you children hearing curse words but yet you curse at them at home for their wrong doing? double standard wouldn't you say? on the the other hand I also, don't think that vulgar language should be broadcast on television either.
I believe that vulgar language is something that needs to be censored by these companies but if there is such an accident just like in these cases, then is shouldn't be the companies responsibility to pay the fines or to get the "bad rep." It is not hard to stop yourself from saying such words but if you cannot control it, then you should have to pay the consequenses.
to start i do not think that it is right that our youth are exposed to vulgar and obscene material as much as they are. yet it is hard to censor programs like the grammys or any other live award shows such as that. the youth are exposed to obscene materials more and more every day. the meanings of these words are starting to have less effects on the public and the way they are being used. maybe i feel this way because i am somewhat younger and out of my vocabulary i use the f-bomb or s-bomb like its going out of style. but really the meaning of words like that are diminishing.
Aaron Lewis
This article is very controversial. I stated something about having expletives in movies as opposed to television. I believe it is ok in movies because there are ratings and certain ages will not be exposed to that if the theater and parents are doing their job to keep children sheltered from that kind of language. As for television, if there are so many problems with these words being used by celebrities maybe we should think about getting rid of live television until these celebrities can control their language. These shows that are live are awards for a certain celebrities profession so at them shouldn't they be acting professional? Using these words is not professional. I believe that they should be fined because they obviously have enough money to pay for DUI's and the other stupid things they do, why not be able to pay for the words you say that can affect young children. Either way the FCC does need to be consistent in their decision and not change it because of the person.
didn't mommy and daddy teach their kids that "sticks and stones may break your bones but words will never hurt."? The fcc is filled with cry baby's. The fcc should not get more power most poeple are respectful enough to watch their mouths on air. Some slip up from time to time but it only in good "classy." so stations should get marked up for .01 second mistake. The courts will just slap a nice fine on them and start delaying broadcast for one second so they can make sure it doesn't happen again. Honestly some things are unacceptable but if you teach your kids about these words there little minds will be fine
There comes a point where the FCC is going to have to stop looking at cases because a profane word was used. How far is it willing to go? I dont know the answer to that question but obviously its seems that they are willing to re analyze what constitutes acceptable and what does not. Honestly i believe that many of the content that people my age watch would be dull if the FCC regulated word choice and context. many of the showes come on later at night and i believe that the FCC only regulates shows to a certain time, correct me if im wrong please. But doing what they are doing is starting to get out of hand. Ultimately we have the choice of what we watch and the FCC cant regulate what every person in this country decides to watch during the day or night. Sure language should be edited to an extent during daytime and primetime view. However, what they are puching to do seems like it will end up having no boundries for its power come later cases. If they dont regulate the context of language in preportion, i believe it to be an abuse of power.
- Zach Tryon
I’m not sure how far the high court will go but I think they should take this case far because eventhough Fox is arguing that parents have more access to monitering their kids and controllign what they have access to on television it is the responsibility of Networks to do their part as well. Arguing that parents have more capabilities to monitor their children is assuming that parents are capable. Not that it is the networks responsibility to raise children, I just feel that with so much influence on the media and kids in general they have a responsibility, with their power, to moniter what they show. I don’t think the FCC should have more power to police profanity because I think they have average power but they don’t use it as it is. Giving them more power will not encourage FCC to respond smartly to profanity on T.V. only respond excessively.
The FCC should not punish the network for this minor slip up. This was a LIVE awards show on national television. The F***ing expletives happen, and you can't shelter your kids forever. Why don't parents explain to their kids where they stand on issues like that when they happen. In this day and age there are plenty of "locks" parents can put on shows to protect their children. Parents can even sanitize films, which is known as either Goodmovies or Clearplay. This is where parent can send films in to specifically edit chosen objectionable content.
Maybe if it weren't for the ACLU and other one-track mind groups we wouldn't being having this conversation. It is all about money. Odds are there is going to be some kind of fine involved, bingo bango bongo. Someone wants to get their hand in someone's pocketbook anyway they can.
I believe that such harsh profanities shouldn't be allowed on public broadcasts. While there are built in monitors and parental controls these days, many people do not have these devices, either by not purchasing them or by owning old products. I don't pretend to know the extent of the court's decision, but i think they should let the FCC police the profanity much more. Make the FCC able to punish the offenders and hopefully, stop extremely harsh language in broadcast TV. - luke
I agree with not letting words like that being able to be said during broadcast television. Like anonymous said, even if you say expletives often, most people should have enough decency and manners to not say them when they realize children would be watching. It's not like if you were babysitting you would walk around in front of the kids you were babysitting saying f-this and f-that. I think that celebrities should really watch themselves when they talk on TV or anything because there are people that look up to them and they should be more careful.I think that if celebrities aren't more careful with what they say on broadcast television people will quit watching broadcast television.
Why cuss at all. Cussing is just a show of a limited vocab caused by a narrow mind. The main thing we should look at with Cher and Richie isn't necessarily what they said, but more of why the said it. If it was truly and honestly a slip up, then we can't fine them for being small minded. But if it was an intentional use of a curse word in an attempt to look "edgy" as one person put it, then yes they should be fined. Kids are very easily influenced. And as one post said "parents should be worrying about more important things". Well the rebuttal would be where do you think the other things start? Swear words degrade other human beings. This degradation leads to lack attitude about human life. Which then leads to murder, sex, rape, incest, you name it. But the network itself shouldn't be fined for the curse word, just the violators. Unless once again the network had a way to sensor it but didn't.
I don't believe that children should constantly be exposed to profanity, but i don't think that the networks should be harshly punished over accidents. The networks cans only do so much to remind people on the show that it's a publicly aired show. But ultimately it's the individual’s choice to use profanity. Parents need to understand that shows like that are live; they know what kind of celebrities are going to be speaking. They know what kind of topics are being presented, if they were really that concerned about exposing their children to that language then they would never even take the risk. In no way should this be a Supreme Court matter, with today's technology it's easy for parents to understand ratings of television and how to block certain shows. The networks are perfectly monitored as they are; this is strictly a matter of parent responsibility.
Post a Comment