While my general concerns about free speech are nearly as absolutist as Reason's Jesse Walker, I see a very specific and definite distinction when it comes to the public airwaves. I do not think the FCC's indecency rules are unreasonable, and if they are gong to have them, they should be enforced. As I have been saying, the public is owed the expectation that broadcasters will work within specific programming parameters that can be relied upon - that's my only concern. I don't even much care what those parameters are, but once they are established, working outside of them is a betrayal of public trust. That's what the commotion is all about regarding the Super Bowl halftime show: the betrayal of trust, not the flash of a breast.
- The DJ who calls himself Bubba the Love Sponge has done many things he probably should be ashamed about, including broadcasting live the castration and slaughter of a pig. But he has never shied from asking questions most of us would prefer to shunt aside, such as "What would happen if Shaggy from Scooby Doo was a crackhead?" A full transcript of the answer is not available, but the Federal Communications Commission has helpfully provided us with a summary:
- The first skit begins when Shaggy tells Scooby Doo that he needs crack cocaine but has no money to buy it. Scooby Doo responds that Shaggy could "su(bleep)ck d(bleep)ick" to pay for the drugs.
In the next skit, the commission continues, "Fat Albert, a/k/a Phat Diddy Daddy, gets killed in a drive-by shooting after bragging that Jennifer Lopez had been "s(bleep)ing Diddy Daddy's (bleep)ck the previous night." A third skit, involving The Jetsons, drops the obsession with oral sex but not the obsession with penises; the fourth, starring Alvin and the Chipmunks, returns to fellatio country. Not content to summarize, the commission draws conclusions as well. The program, it notes, contains "graphic and explicit references to sexual and excretory organs." What's more, "the use of cartoon characters in such a sexually explicit manner during hours of the day when children are likely to be listening is shocking and makes this segment patently offensive," especially since "young children would be particularly attentive listeners to this segment because of the character voices and the cartoon theme music used in the segment." For that reason, it concludes, "this segment is apparently indecent."
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - Hal Pawluk
Ambidextrous today?
2 - bhw
I really loathe the censorhip arm of the FCC. But on the one hand, with radio, you can't block out stations like you can on TV, so I see how you can't really control what kids are and aren't listening to on the radio.
On the other hand, I think the audience should decide -- a la the public outcry over the Super Bowl half-time show -- what is and isn't appropriate. Unfortunately, you can't trust 'em. That "love sponge" bit wasn't even *remotely* funny, so how is this guy on the air in the first place? Who the hell is the audience? WHY is anyone listening to this guy?
I think I'm okay with setting a time frame for when "adult" content is broadcast. I have to think about it more, though. But I still don't like the wholesale banning of certain content, no matter when it's broadcast. I don't think the gov't should be telling people what they can and can't say to large audiences even if they're using "public airwaves". It makes me itchy.
3 - Eric Olsen
Hal, um?
bhw, I agree the "public" should decide what the standards are: the fact that the public responded so strongly to the Super Bowl indicates their standards werre violated. As I said, I don't so much care WHAT the standards are, as I care about making those standards concrete, objective, publicly known, and then enforced. And I don't know who else could enforce them other than the FCC.
4 - bhw
I guess that as long as the profit motive is there, that networks can't be trusted to draw a line anywhere. If they think it will sell, they'll do it.
5 - Hal Pawluk
Hal, um?
Seems kind of leftie for a rightie.
6 - Hal Pawluk
Or maybe it's the other way on this issue :-)
7 - Eric Olsen
I am a nothingy - I'm not sure how much more clear that could be by now.
8 - Karl
Is it possible that anyone knows what the rules are.
I am befuddled by local zoning that has me required to apply for a special permit at my thransmiter/studio radio station site ... I've consented to the request for a hearing for the special permit.
However, I would like to stay on the air ...is it concievable that I can provide a remote broadcast with a broadcast van.
This is not a fixed location ...and should be permitted without having to get a special permit.
Lots of radio stations provide remotes from various locations when they do promotions ... news crews do it when they cover a story.
The town is requiring me to get a special permit to broadcast ...huh???