Television is afraid of the word "fuck," plain and simple.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) maintains the "Safe Harbor" rule, which says "indecent" material (i.e. profanity, nudity, etc.) on broadcast (meaning free) TV is okay only between the hours of 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. Live broadcasts (such as awards shows and sporting events) are often threatened with fines when an impromptu "fuck" is uttered or a woman's breast is bared (though it should be noted that these fines are usually later dismissed in court). The government has decided, after rulings offered by the Supreme Court, that subscription services are exempt from anti-obscenity rules. So if you can pay for cable television, you can hear "fuck" and see boobs and then, when you need to, dial on down to the Disney channel for the young 'uns—the theory here being that poor people who can't afford cable must be protected from words and images but rich people are competent to make their own decisions?
The "Safe Harbor" rule is not only classist, but also outdated. Today, for our generation, even DVRs are old-school; most people I know download almost all of what they watch. Technology allows people to watch what they want, when they want, therefore a 10 p.m. standard is meaningless.
So I say we should give up the ban on words like "fuck." It makes no sense, and having rules that are obviously silly, hypocritical, and classist undermines both the rules and the "rule-makers." And while I'm here, why can't they allow some limited frontal nudity, as they do on TV in Europe? As the youngest child of two self-proclaimed hippies, growing up I saw nudity in films and heard worse language from my parents than I've ever heard on TV, and I'm a healthy, sane, and reasonably productive member of society. We could just use the TV-Mature ratings on broadcast and basic cable like they have on HBO and Showtime, so poor and rich people alike can decide for themselves whether or not they want to see a show with certain themes and words.
I believe that the less government interference the better in just about every situation. If the government were to limit the content of cable television it will open a whole new door of limiting what is on television. The government should not be interfering with freedom of speech, or in this case freedom of entertainment.
ReplyDeleteThere is another side to this issue which makes me very hesitant to stick with my limited government beliefs. Only a couple decades ago, pornography, cussing in public (especially in front of women), and extreme violence were not seen or talked about on a regular basis in America. It has been said that the morale of America has gone down with the increase of nudity, vulgar language, and violence on television and movies. This provides a major problem for a couple reasons. Number one, children are being exposed to much more at a younger age and this is hurting the morals of our country. Number two, every empire in the history of the world has fallen eventually, and one of the common themes in all these falling empires is a drop and lowering of morals. There were many other reoccurring themes, but the lowering of morals is one which goes hand in hand with the media. By exposing pornography and nudity, society is abusing the female and male bodies and is portraying them as objects instead of incredible works of creation. By objectifying the human body, it is easy to see relationships and marriages as disposable and for only pleasure. The domino effect of exposing pornography and vulgar language on television of any kind is something we all need to consider when deciding what to allow through media.
I couldn’t agree more with Blake on the impact of television on a society, nation, and people. It seems to me that each and every year television makers are pushing the boundaries of what we consider moral, and often going past them. Even companies who are considered “standard” such as ABC, NBC, and CBS seem to be putting out new series that leave me asking, “can they put that on TV?” I could almost guarantee you that if there was a study that matched American’s moral beliefs with the content on Television at a given time, you’d find that as more content was allowed to be aired the peoples morals began to change. As an example, the cartoon The Flintstones was the first program, cartoon or live action, to portray a couple sleeping in the same bed. This was a huge deal at that time even thought they were a happily married couple. Examples like this just show that television is a gigantic influence in American culture. We believe and are shaped by just about everything we hear and see on television. Also I don’t think that the framers of the Constitution intended for T.V. to be a right. It is merely a luxury. The FCC needs to continue its censorship of television not only for the integrity of individual morals, but for the good of our Nation as a whole.
ReplyDeleteBrennan Burling