F-Word OK on TV

Pop diva Cher, during the Billboard Music Awards of Dec. 9, 2002, had two words for her critics: "F--- 'em."

It took the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals 53 pages to tell pro-family advocates that it was A-OK for her to do so.

Cher's obscenity was aired, uncensored, on Fox during what is typically classified as family viewing time. The Federal Communications Commission scolded Fox for the slip (though the FCC did not fine the network), and for a similar occurrence on the same awards show the following year.

But on June 4, the court told the FCC that it had no right to take Fox to task for this pesky profanity. The court declared that the FCC's policies on the matter were "inconsistent and arbitrary," that the f-word and its cussin' cousin, the s-word, are not necessarily "profane" or "indecent," according to the letter of the law.

The ruling was painted as a victory for broadcast networks, who fret about censorship and would rather not be bothered by the potentially hefty fines the FCC could slap on offenders. FCC chairman Kevin Martin was less bullish.

"I find it hard to believe that the New York court would tell American families that [the s-word] and [the f-word] are fine to say on broadcast television during the hours when children are most likely to be in the audience," Martin said in a statement.

A Largesse of Legalese
A quick look at the ruling suggests that both the FCC and the court were engaged in nitpicking legalese—debating whether the f-word always describes or suggests a sexual act. If it does, that would make it legally "indecent" and would therefore put its television usage under the FCC's jurisdiction.

But to us non-lawyers out here, it seems pretty obvious that whether the f-word is legally "indecent" is beside the point. A fourth-grade teacher isn't going to decide what little Bobby really meant if he lets the word fly during math class. Mom won't be diagramming sentences if Sally says her sister is a ... well, you get the point.

The f-word is obscene and offensive. It doesn't matter whether it's used as a verb, noun, adjective or interjection. The word owes its very popularity to its ability to offend. It draws negative attention like a car crash on the highway. It's a one-syllable magnet—not because of its etymology or even because it has exactly four letters, but because of its very inappropriateness.

Anyone who thinks Cher didn't use the word specifically for its shock value please take your hand off your mouse scroll-wheel and raise it high.

Anyone?

The court says the FCC is inconsistent when it comes to the word since, among other things, it targeted Fox for allowing Cher to use the word, but it gave ABC a free pass when it aired the R-rated war movie Saving Private Ryan—and its multitude of f-words—uncut in 2004.

It argues that, with the new V-chip technology, parents have more control over what their children watch than ever before.

But do they really? Setting aside for the moment that some parents must ask their tech-savvy children how to use the V-chip, it's worth noting that the V-chip is usually only yanked out of day-to-day oblivion by either politicians or entertainment executives trying to lend credence to their PowerPoint presentations. Installed on most television sets since 2000, the largely ignored chip allows parents to block programs by using a newly developed rating system ... that is determined, instituted and overseen by individual networks and channels.

And therein lies a big problem.

V Stands for Variety
In the case of Saving Private Ryan, ABC made it clear via the rating system that the film would contain uncomfortable and objectionable content. Additionally, Sen. John McCain, when he introduced the film, said as much. And ABC aired additional warnings at the beginning of the program and during each of the broadcast's 10 commercial breaks. While some groups and individuals brought complaints against the network anyway, viewers who were paying attention at all couldn't have been surprised by Saving Private Ryan's content.

"Fair warning is appropriately an important consideration in indecency cases," wrote chairman Michael Powell in the FCC's decision that ABC didn't do anything wrong. "In complaints you often find that Americans are not excessively prudish, only that they are fed up with being ambushed with content at times and places they least expect it."

Cher's comments at the awards show, then, amounted to such an ambush. Awards shows like that typically appeal to younger viewers, often more tuned in to popular culture and music than their parents. The V-chip could not have anticipated Cher's language and blocked the show the moment she walked up on stage. Fox did not warn viewers the cuss was coming.

Granted, the awards were handed out live, and some might argue the network couldn't have anticipated that Cher would let fly with an f-bomb. I'm not moved. A simple seven-second delay would have easily allowed Fox to exercise its "bleep" button and preserve the integrity of the show's predetermined rating.

License to Curse
In truth, the V-chip has caused more problems than it has solved. It's given more license than it's provided protective cover for families looking for reprieve. And its built-in downsides and inconsistencies should have long ago rendered it a non-issue when it comes to reinforcing the morally and socially acceptable limits of broadcast TV. Especially in a supposedly well-reasoned 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision.