followthemedia.com - a knowledge base for media professionals
Media Rules and Rulers
ftm newsletter

ftm newsletter updates leading media news each Monday and Thursday.
Click here and you will receive it in your inbox.

AGENDA

All Things Digital
This digital environment

Big Business
Media companies and their world

Brands
Brands and branding, modern and post

The Commonweal
Media associations and institutes

Conflict Zones
Media making a difference

Fit To Print
The Printed Word and the Publishing World

Lingua Franca
Culture and language

Media Rules and Rulers
Media politics

The Numbers
Watching, listening and reading

The Public Service
Public Service Broadcasting

Show Business
Entertainment and entertainers

Sports and Media
Rights, cameras and action

Spots and Space
The Advertising Business

Write On
Journalism with a big J

Send ftm Your News!!
news@followthemedia.com

The real “F” Words in US Television Programming Today Are Fear And FCC

It all seems too silly to be true – that in the land of free speech, television stations quiver in case a curse word or two uttered on air during a news documentary covering the 9/11 tragedy will cost those network affiliates hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.


Even heroes doing their job should not be heard?

It’s OK for food producers advertising on television to aim their fatty foods at the very young – and then we wonder why there is so much obesity — and its even OK for beloved cartoon characters on TV to commit some act of violence every minute or so – and then we wonder why the kids are violent, too. But for a fireman to utter the “F” word in the real world of the 9/11 tragedy and have that shown on television – well, obviously, that’s a word too far. Obviously Mom and Dad never hear such language during their daily lives and the kids, of course, never experience hearing those words in the school playground.

Observing this nonsense from across the ocean, far enough away that we can see the US television forest for all the trees, one can only wonder whether the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) understands how infantile it appears in the eyes of the free-speaking world. But in the land of the Stars and Stripes where freedom of the speech has such a precious meaning politics is everywhere and Americans once again are having to rely on their courts to do what the servants of the people should have done in the first place.

What brings all of this to a head is that some CBS television affiliates did not broadcast this week a documentary showing the horror of 9/11 because it showed a fireman or two uttering some expletives as they dealt with the tragedy of that day. Are the men, women and older children of America not up to seeing and hearing this?  The images of those towers collapsing, the bodies, the horror of all those people running around blood-soaked – that’s ok, but not the language of that day?

ftm background

A Cartoon Rabbit Visits Two Lesbian Families and Soldiers Actually Swear In A Documentary about Iraq -- It’s All Too Much for US Public Broadcasting and They’re Looking for a New PBS Boss
With the House of Representatives approving a bill in record time to increase indecency fines from $$32,500 to $500,000, the US Secretary of Education demanding a refund of the department’s funding for a cartoon show...

Private Ryan Is Saved, But Now the FCC Investigates the Olympic Games Opening Ceremony
The FCC has finally made it clear: One “F” word used by a star at a US televised awards ceremony is a no-no!

Is Saving Private Ryan a Bridge Too Far?
We had warned that the US FCC crackdown on indecency after the Janet Jackson“nipplegate” incident would have effects far beyond US borders,  and first indications regretfully prove we are right.

Turn the FCC Loose in Europe and the US National Debt Would Soon Become a Surplus
For less than a split second of seeing Janet Jackson’s pierced nipple aired by CBS at the Super Bowl, the FCC fines the network $550,000. Gee, it makes one wonder how it would react watching the hardcore sex on France’s Canal Plus or the softcore sex that even some European public stations broadcast.

US DJ Moves to Satellite Radio in $500m deal
In a move that rattled American broadcasters but startled few financial analysts, notorious shock-jock Howard Stern will leave Infinity Radio for Sirius Satellite Radio in 2006

The comment of one station manager who did not show the documentary sums it up. “We wanted to show it. It’s of an historic nature. These are real things and real people,” said Bill Preston, general manager of KRTV, Great Falls, Montana. So why didn’t he?

Because the station was afraid it could fall foul of FCC rules covering cursing and could end up with a $325,000 fine that Congress (the politicians) recently approved for programming that exceeds “the bounds of decency”.

The fine had been $32,500 per incident but after the Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction in the 2004 Super Bowl the politicians were determined that nipples, bad language and the like had no place on US terrestrial TV, and after two years of trying the politicians finally agreed to increase the fines 10-fold.

One problem is that the FCC won’t say beforehand what is punishable and what is not. It’s take your chances and see what happens. And with fines at the new level some television stations vote with their arms and pull the plug.

To its merit, the FCC does say that if it receives a complaint it will consider the context of the film and it does note that an edited version of the documentary (without expletives) has aired twice before with no fines.

But that’s not the same as telling stations they have nothing to fear from showing the film given new circumstances, and to smaller affiliates like those in Montana a $325,000 fine just is not in the budget. So, in effect, the FCC rules the airwaves by fear of what it might do and if that isn’t the power of “Big Brother” then what is?

This 9/11 incident is similar to what happened when ABC ran the movie “Saving Private Ryan” on Veterans Day (Nov. 11), 2004. Remember the hue and cry then?

It was the same year of the Janet Jackson incident, and although the new fines were not yet in place TV stations really feared what could happen if they showed Steven Spielberg’s masterpiece. Sixty-six ABC affiliates declined to show the film – 30% of the ABC stations across the country – because they feared the FCC would crack down because of the film’s initial violence and bad language (it was, after all, just the D-Day landing!)

ABC had shown the film twice before – just as CBS has shown its documentary twice before – and there were no problems. The FCC was asked before the third Private Ryan showing whether the program violated any rules, and the FCC refused to answer saying that would be prior censorship. But it did point out that after the previous showings there had been no action, and at the end of that third longest day –- actually it took a few months to decide -- the FCC took no action.

But 66 affiliates then, and about 10% of CBS affiliates this year, cowered in fear of what might happen to them if they did show the programming, and that is something that just should not be in a free democracy.

Thankfully there are the US courts, and a federal appeals court ruled last week there should be a temporary halt to the FCCs enforcement of indecency rules so that the agency could clarify them within 60 days. One would have thought that would have given the okay for those CBS affiliates that were afraid, but some still chose to play it very safe and not show the documentary.

That doesn’t mean that everything is taken care of. The FCC will produce its rules, and if the courts say they are clear and lawful (even if they don’t agree with them) then we could well be back where we are with fear still ruling the airwaves, since interpretation of even clear rules by stations will err on the side of their safety.

In Europe this is all handled in a far more adult way with the assumption made that parents do have some responsibility in what their children do and do not see, and, for that matter, parents are responsible enough to decide what they themselves watch, too.  If there is programming that the station believes contains excessive violence or bad language it doesn’t hold that program back but rather it places a notice at the bottom of the screen throughout the program saying it is inappropriate for the under 12s or the under 16s.  

In the UK, for instance, there is what is called the Watershed – after 9 p.m. when family viewing, by general consensus is over, and adults now have their time to watch programming aimed at them. But even that can run into trouble. When BBC2 last year showed the movie “Pulp Fiction” starting at 9:10 p.m., all of nine viewers complained about its violence and language and the TV regulator agreed. The regulator accepted the program began after the Watershed began, but said it contained seriously offensive language, graphic violence and drug abuse during its first 20 minutes and that made it too early to show the film.

But there was no pronouncement that the film shouldn’t be aired, there was no fine, but rather a statement for the future that if you’re going to show that kind of language and violence in a fictional setting do it when the chances are improved that its mostly just adults watching. 

Here in Switzerland it is very common on the public broadcasting stations to see movies and original US cable shows like the Sopranos shown unedited and broadcast in the original English and dubbed into the local language via the two-channel audio system. The station’s logo is on-screen as usual, but if it is considered “adult viewing” then usually the logo is underlined in red, and there is a warning before the program begins. But at least the program is transmitted.

The European view is basically that the household should control what is seen in the house. There is plenty of programming choice out there and households are quite capable of making the right decision that fits their circumstances. In the US its pretty obvious the politicians and religious lobby groups don’t trust the family to make the “right” choices, so the “state” should make that decision for them through fear and intimidation to restrict that choice.

Fear is very persuasive in controlling freedom of speech, and for television the FCC is Fear’s main agent. That’s why Fear and FCC are the real “F” words.



ftm Follow Up & Comments

copyright ©2004-2006 ftm partners, unless otherwise noted Contact UsSponsor ftm