Here's today's Washington Watch Daily commentary from FRC Radio:
After a new ruling, it looks like broadcast television will be airing on the vulgar side. Just a year after the FCC cracked down on indecency, a three-judge panel decided the policy on “fleeting expletives” was too vague. According to the court, profanity that’s live and unscripted shouldn’t be banned—or even punished. Although the court said the FCC’s rules are “arbitrary,” the reality is that the policy was finally helping to clean up network television by holding broadcasters responsible. It’s ironic. Courts are defending the right to curse on primetime television but want to censor words like “traditional values.” Not too long ago, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled words like “natural family” should be banned in the workplace. The court sided with a supervisor who ordered employees to take down a flier that advertised a forum on faith and current issues. Why? Because it contained words like “traditional marriage” that the court considered “hate speech.” Americans had better start seriously questioning the direction of our country if the only controversial word that begins with “f” is “family.”
To download this commentary as an MP3, follow this link. For an e-mail subscription to the Washington Watch Daily radio commentary, go here.
Comments (1)
You didn't quite understand the new ruleing. The court didn't say the FCC could or couldn't prohibit specific words - only that its policies were far to vague and subject to interpretation or abuse.
All the FCC needs to do is write some perfectly clear rules. Ones that are sufficiently unambiguous that the FCC cant let a violation slide due to its producers political connections, or clamp down hard on a minor offense because those in power object to the program.
June 13, 2007 2:25 PM | Comment Permalink