Here's a good/short read on the Future of Music Coalition's recent action in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the FCC's perplexing and wildly inconsistent indecency policy.
As someone who's been putting together weekly radio shows for getting on 20 years now, the constant wondering if some expletive's variant exceeds these cryptic "standards" is something I've grown quite weary of. (And is perhaps part of the reason I've packed up the broadcast version of my radio program for the wild west of the internet.) Here are two popular examples of the bewildering topics I've had to consider vis-à-vis so-called "indecency" in the broadcast environment:
1. The word "pissed". Used on air in one context, i.e. "pissed off", it's OK -- not indecent. Used on air in another context, i.e. "pissed on", NOT OK -- indecent, and a punishable offense. Yet strangely, the variable that makes the difference—the word "on"—isn't a cussword by anyone's standards. Except for the FCC. Come again, sailor?
2. The late night "safe harbor" period is alleged to grant some broadcast leeway in the airing of expletives, so long as they are not sexual or excretory in nature. If you've read this blog even semi-regularly, you know that I am not one for needlessly lewd discussion or extraneous profanity. I'd even go so far as to say that I keep things downright family-friendly most of the time. Yet thanks to the FCC, I have had to give professional consideration to matters of whether or not an instance of the word "shit" is excretory in nature. Similarly, I have labored exhaustively on numerous occasions regarding the sexual or non-sexual implications of various uses of the word "fuck". Believe it or not, working in mass media today frequently involves discussions of sexual/non-sexual fucks and excretory/non-excretory shits with one's colleagues.
At the lunch table.
Via email.
One time, I paged the entire building in a panic because I suddenly feared that something I was playing could be construed as having a sexual or excretory subtext. And why are we so paranoid? Because the FCC demands it. And before you tell me that if I just listened to nice music like the Jonas Brothers or Mariah Carey, such language issues would never come into play, let me remind you that these same standards apply in a news/talk radio environment. And as recent history has taught us, sometimes saucy language is newsworthy in and of itself.
Suffice to say, all this talk of f*cking and sh!tting is probably enough to make a truck driver blush. It makes me wonder who the perverts are that get paid to think about this stuff all day long and come up with these policies. Whoever they are, I certainly wouldn't want to introduce them (let alone Ernie Anastos) to my parents. If only there was some kind of agency I could complain to about them...
Oh. Right.
Comments