FCC SHOULD NOT OVER-REACT (4-2004) Late last fall the Federal Communications Commission shrugged off the complaints of a TV watchdog group about U2 singer Bono’s utterance of the f-word during the Golden Globe Awards. In its ruling, the FCC stated, “We have found that offensive language used as an insult rather than as a description of sexual or excretory activities or organs is not within the scope of the commission's prohibition of indecent program content.” But when Janet Jackson bared her right breast on national television during a live broadcast of the Super Bowl earlier this year, a public outcry against indecency on TV resulted. That outcry caused the FCC to toughen the standards of what it will allow on broadcast TV and radio. In fact the FCC even changed its mind regarding the Bono incident, ruling that NBC was in violation for allowing the word to be uttered on the air, even though it was uttered live. No fines, however, were levied against the network. But now, some broadcasters and artists are starting to fight back against the FCC’s tough stance, calling it a possible violation of free speech rights. In fact, just last week, they presented the FCC with a petition voicing their concerns. A coalition of more than 20 broadcasters, artists' groups and media organizations signed a petition asking the FCC to reconsider its recent ruling that toughens the standards against profanity uttered over the airwaves. Only Disney- owned ABC was silent on the matter. The broadcaster groups complain that the FCC has expanded its authority beyond what the Constitution allows. Some say we have entered an era of “sexual McCarthyism.” The attorney for the petitioners claimed that the FCC was no longer trying to enforce community standards against indecency, but was trying to rewrite them. Some programmers are starting to run scared. They have been deleting decades-old rock songs from their radio play lists and editing questionable vocabulary even from documentary films. NBC’s petition faulted the FCC’s ruling as being too vague and said that it “will encourage a 'play-it-safe' attitude by broadcasters in the exercise of their editorial judgment -- a chilling effect that cannot be squared with the public interest or the Constitution.” The Janet Jackson incident has even brought Congress into the fray. It has encouraged the FCC to toughen its policies on indecency and may stiffen fines for violations. The public outcry against indecency on family-hour television programs is understandable. But Congress and the FCC should avoid knee-jerk reactions to the situation. Broadcasters say that while obscene programming should be kept off public airwaves, not all instances of profane language or nudity amount to indecency. We want to be careful not to get into a situation where an errant curse word on a news broadcast or live interview will result in a fine to the broadcaster. The FCC needs to go back to its earlier, simpler policy of forgiving isolated and fleeting instances where profanity is used on television and radio. The television audience is vastly different at 8:00 PM than it is at midnight. Broadcasters and screenwriters should be careful not to use profanity during the earlier evening hours when children are watching. After 11:00 o’clock, however, adults are by far the main audience. During these times, restrictions on what cannot be uttered should be relaxed. The FCC said it would consider the petition. However, there is no deadline for a ruling. If the FCC does not acquiesce to the broadcaster’s requests, they may allow the courts to decide whether or not the commission has overstepped its bounds. Certainly, the FCC needs to protect children from indecency on the tube. But it should be careful not to go too far. TV is for adults, too. There is no need to force G-rated programming on the public during late-night hours or on programs that children typically do not watch.