Related Research Articles
The seven dirty words are seven English-language curse words that American comedian George Carlin first listed in his 1972 "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television" monologue. The words, in the order Carlin listed them, are: "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits".
Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, unanimously ruling that anti-indecency provisions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech. This was the first major Supreme Court ruling on the regulation of materials distributed via the Internet.
Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court that defined the power of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over indecent material as applied to broadcasting.
The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints. In 1987, the FCC abolished the fairness doctrine, prompting some to urge its reintroduction through either Commission policy or congressional legislation. However, later the FCC removed the rule that implemented the policy from the Federal Register in August 2011.
Johnny Dare is an American radio personality. He is host of The Johnny Dare Morning Show the morning show for 98.9 The Rock in Mission, Kansas. He is one of the station's more prominent figures, and hosts the station's annual concert festival, Rockfest, which has grown to become the biggest one-day concert event in the country.
The Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005 is an enrolled bill, passed by both Houses of the 109th United States Congress, to increase the fines and penalties for violating the prohibitions against the broadcast of obscene, indecent, or profane language. It was originally proposed in 2004 as the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2004 ; this preliminary bill was never passed. Republican Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas sponsored both United States Senate bills; Senators Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), George Allen (R-Va.) initially co-sponsored the bill at its reintroduction on January 26, 2005.
In American constitutional law, a statute is void for vagueness and unenforceable if it is too vague for the average citizen to understand. This is because constitutionally permissible activity may not be chilled because of a statute's vagueness. There are several reasons a statute may be considered vague; in general, a statute might be void for vagueness when an average citizen cannot generally determine what persons are regulated, what conduct is prohibited, or what punishment may be imposed. For example, criminal laws which do not state explicitly and definitely what conduct is punishable are void for vagueness. A statute is also void for vagueness if a legislature's delegation of authority to judges or administrators is so extensive that it could lead to arbitrary prosecutions. A law can also be "void for vagueness" if it imposes on First Amendment freedom of speech, assembly, or religion.
In American jurisprudence, the overbreadth doctrine is primarily concerned with facial challenges to laws under the First Amendment.
Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), was a seminal First Amendment ruling at the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that radio broadcasters enjoyed free speech rights under the First Amendment, but those rights could be partially restricted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to maintain the public interest in equitable use of scarce broadcasting frequencies. As a result, the FCC's Fairness Doctrine was found to be constitutional.
"Sit on My Face" is a short song by the members of the comedy troupe Monty Python which originally appeared on the album Monty Python's Contractual Obligation Album and later appeared on the compilation Monty Python Sings. Written by Eric Idle, the song's lyrics are sung to the melody of "Sing As We Go" (1934) by Harry Parr-Davies, made popular by Gracie Fields. The opening gives way to the voices of The Fred Tomlinson Singers singing "Sit on my face and tell me that you love me." The remaining lyrics contain numerous references to fellatio and cunnilingus, such as "when I'm between your thighs you blow me away" and "life can be fine if we both 69".
In broadcast law, the pervasiveness doctrine is the doctrine stating that media content of broadcasts is subject to regulation because broadcast radio waves are available to anyone and therefore "uniquely pervasive". In general, profanity and sex, or other adult material deemed "indecent" by a broadcasting authority, may not be broadcast outside of overnight "watershed" or "safe harbor" hours when children are unlikely to be awake. Material deemed "obscene" may still be prohibited at all times.
WSUC-FM is a college radio station broadcasting a variety format from the State University of New York at Cortland. The station is owned and licensed by the State University of New York at Cortland in Cortland, New York, United States.
Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 (2009), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that upheld regulations of the Federal Communications Commission that ban "fleeting expletives" on television broadcasts, finding they were not arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. The constitutional issue, however, was not resolved and was remanded to the Second Circuit and re-appealed to the Supreme Court for a decision in June 2012.
An obscenity is any utterance or act that strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time. It is derived from the Latin obscēnus, obscaenus, "boding ill; disgusting; indecent", of uncertain etymology. Such loaded language can be used to indicate strong moral repugnance and outrage, in expressions such as "obscene profits" and "the obscenity of war". As a legal term, it usually refers to graphic depictions of people engaged in sexual and excretory activity, and related utterances of profanity.
Between 1990 and 2004, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued fines totaling $2.5 million to radio licensees for airing material it deemed indecent from The Howard Stern Show, the highest amount of any American radio show. The Supreme Court had provided broadcasting guidelines for indecent material in its 1978 ruling in its landmark decision, in which the court prohibited the "seven dirty words" made famous by comedian George Carlin. The FCC had received complaints about Howard Stern as early as 1981, but its limited power at the time prevented further action taking place.
Sable Communications of California v. Federal Communications Commission, 492 U.S. 115 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the definition of "indecent material" and whether it is protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court invalidated part of a federal law that prohibited "dial-a-porn" telephone messaging services by making it a crime to transmit commercial telephone messages that were either "obscene" or "indecent".
Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 567 U.S. 239 (2012), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding whether the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's scheme for regulating speech is unconstitutionally vague. The Supreme Court excused the broadcasters from paying fines levied for what the FCC had determined indecency, in a majority opinion delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy. The Supreme Court had previously issued an opinion in the case in 2009 addressing the nature of the fine itself, without addressing the restriction on indecent speech.
United States obscenity law deals with the regulation or suppression of what is considered obscenity and therefore not protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In the United States, discussion of obscenity typically relates to defining what pornography is obscene, as well as to issues of freedom of speech and of the press, otherwise protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Issues of obscenity arise at federal and state levels. State laws operate only within the jurisdiction of each state, and there are differences among such laws. Federal statutes ban obscenity and child pornography produced with real children. Federal law also bans broadcasting of "indecent" material during specified hours.
Dick is a common English slang word for the human penis. It is also used by extension for a variety of slang purposes, generally considered vulgar, including: as a verb to describe sexual activity; and as a pejorative term for individuals who are considered to be rude, abrasive, inconsiderate, or otherwise contemptible. In this context, it can be used interchangeably with jerk, and can also be used as a verb to describe rude or deceitful actions. Variants include dickhead, which literally refers to the glans. The offensiveness of the word dick is complicated by the continued use of the word in inoffensive contexts, including as both a given name and a surname, the popular British dessert spotted dick, the classic novel Moby-Dick, the Dick and Jane series of children's books, and the American retailer Dick's Sporting Goods. Uses such as these have provided a basis for comedy writers to exploit this juxtaposition through double entendre.
Inappropriateness refers to standards or ethics that are typically viewed as being negative in a society. It differs from things that are illicit in that inappropriate behavior does not necessarily have any accompanying legal ramifications.
References
Notes
- ↑ Levy 2008, pp. 1–2.
- ↑ Levy 2008, p. 6 "though [ George Carlin's] monologue was not obscene, it was indecent".
- ↑ FCC 2001 "FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978), provides the judicial foundation for FCC indecency enforcement. In that case, the Supreme Court held that the government could constitutionally regulate indecent broadcasts. In addition, the Court quoted the Commission's definition of indecency with apparent approval."
- ↑ FCC 2015.
- ↑ Goodale & Frieden 2014, p. 6.58-7 "In 1987, in response to growing public and congressional concern about the amount of sex and violence on television, the FCC announced that it actively would begin to apply the definition of indecency used in the Pacifica case and would punish licensees that transmitted indecent programs. In 1987, the FCC concluded that three different broadcasts, two of which were aired after 10:00 p.m., constituted 'actionable indecency,' subject to punishment under the Communications Act."
- ↑ Levy 2008, p. 43a "The newly revived and potentially expansive category of the 'profane' under Section 1464 also raises constitutional issues. Whatever the validity of the argument that Pacifica can serve as the springboard for expansive indecency regulation, it is certainly true that neither Pacifica nor any subsequent Supreme Court case opined on the constitutional permissibility of the commission’s definition of 'profane' under Section 1464. That definition — including "personally reviling epithets," "language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance," and "vulgar, irreverent, or coarse language" — is even more open-ended than the agency's definitions of actionable indecency. The new definition of the 'profane' is either co-extensive with indecency and therefore unnecessary, or so ambiguously more expansive as to pose even greater vagueness and overbreadth problems than the definition of indecency. In addition, an argument grounded on the history of the indecency rules' application might have constitutional traction."
- ↑ Levy 2008, p. 43b.
- ↑ Levy 2008, p. 2 "programs targeting particular groups (such as gay men) could all be found to have aired actionable indecency even if they did not use any of the forbidden words"
- ↑ Yokabitus 2012 "Children ... are within an arm's reach of a world of indecent material: smart phones, laptops, late night premium television, etc. ... [I]f parents are tasked with the responsibility of protecting their children from exposure to indecent materials on these mediums, why can't we just add public television to list [ sic ] as well?"
Sources
- Industry Guidance On the Commission's Case Law Interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 1464 and Enforcement Policies Regarding Broadcast Indecency (Policy statement), Federal Communications Commission, April 6, 2001, EB-00-IH-0089
- "Obscene Indecent and Profane Broadcasts", Consumer Help Center (Official website), Federal Communications Commission, retrieved 2015-10-02
- Lipschultz, J. (2008), Broadcast and Internet Indecency: Defining Free Speech, Routledge Communication Series, Taylor & Francis, p. 195, ISBN 978-1-135-59628-6
- Goodale, J.C.; Frieden, R. (2014), All about Cable and Broadband, Communications law series, Law Journal Press, ISBN 978-1-58852-012-8
- Levy, Lili (April 2008), The FCC's Regulation of Indecency (PDF), First Amendment Center, archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-11-23, retrieved 2015-10-02
- Yokabitus, Paul (July 20, 2012), "Actionably Indecent: Is the FCC Still Needed in Modern America?", Campbell Law Observer, Campbell University