Craig Ferguson got bleeped for saying the word “beaver” and it wasn’t used as a euphemism! It got bleeped if someone from Beaverton would email in, or if he was actually talking about the animal for a legitimate reason! Of course, Craig did turn that in to loads of fun for himself and just showed an actual picture of a beaver and would say stuff like “you know the word for that animal I just showed. It rhymes with cleaver…”
Even MORE insane: they’ve even blurred a PUPPET’S MOUTH (and beeped the word) when Craig (who is off camera at the time) actually swears using the puppet. I absolutely could NOT believe that they did that!
The only reason I can figure for bleeping certain words on late night is because of TIVO and DVRs. People can conceivably be watching an “after the watershed” show during the time when kids could hear.
David Letterman once complained that he couldn’t say the word “bullshit” on his show without getting bleeped, even though the same network (CBS) had previously shown On Golden Pond (the play, not the film version) where a character said the same word without getting bleeped. (It’s art, donchaknow?) To underline the point, he repeatedly ran a clip from the play, then tried saying the same word himself:
As acetylene’s cite notes the FCC recently decided to be stricter on what it considers inappropriate at times when children normally would be viewing the show. So what was allowed 10 years ago, may not be now. Also, see my prior cite to Dorf’s column.
Something similar happened to Craig. It was during the time that Swingtown was on and they were allowed to say some word that Craig got beeped for (maybe that was the beaver reference?).
Anyway, I remember him complaining about it because they got to say it on that show, which was on the same network and on at an earlier time.
I believe it was Bono who said “fucking” on a music awards show, as an intensive (“this is really, really, fucking brilliant”). The ruling, after much ado, was that it’s OK to say “fucking” if you’re not actually talking about, you know, fucking.
I can’t see the sense in that reasoning at all. Profanity isn’t a seperate category, it’s part of normal content. So if the FCC allows mind-numbing entertainment like dialy soaps or talk shows to air for convenience, instead of only showing the news for necessity and BBC reports for interest, then why is fucking and shit censored?
That’s important to keep the freedom of press (which is not only printed media), because a free, neutral press that serves as watchdog (and not as Paris Hilton /Faux News show) is important to a functioning democracy.
That’s part of the technical way to run things. It’s like saying that your car needs to be identified by a license plate - that regulation doesn’t prohibit you from driving where you want (Within the legal limits).
part of free press: you have to be able to seperate news from paid and therefore subjective content.
makes sense to not favour one candidate over the other, again freedom /neutrality of the press.
You mean, like the War of the Worlds radiplay that caused a panic? That’s similar to not shouting fire in a crowded theater to cause a panic, because people could get hurt or killed.
Is that the legal description of having a TV programme?
Well, the rest make sense, only censoring profanity and boobs but nothing else is what I can’t wrap my mind around.
I used to collect TV censorship incidents in the 1970’s-80’s. Things might have changed since, but I found it interesting that if someone said “God Damn,” that “God” was censored but “Damn” was not. I can only conclude that blasphemy enflames censors more than vulgarity.
constanze you may agree or disagree with the rules the FCC makes, but the important thing to remember is that they apply ONLY to broadcasters that use the “public” airwaves. There is no law, for example, that forbids me to print a newsletter anonymously and distribute it to my neighbors. There is no law that requires a newspaper or magazine to sell or give advertising space to all candidates for political office, or even to mark paid content as advertising.
On FX (a basic cable network), there are several dramas and comedies in which the word “shit” is routinely said: The Riches, Damages, It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, The Shield, Rescue Me.
As others have noted, cable is not regulated by the FCC. Censorship is done by the individual networks and the shows’ producers. Matt Stone and Trey Parker have said that Comedy Central doesn’t censor South Park, that they censor it on their own because they think it sounds funnier with the bleeps. Comedy Central has even run the movie uncensored, abeit after 1:00 in the morning. Comedy Central also runs other movies uncensored during hours when adults are more likely to be watching.
It’s hard to explain the U.S. system to anyone from another country, partly because the U.S. system is unlike anything else and partly because it’s riven with internal contradictions between our professed ideal of free expression and the reality that everybody is offended by something.
The FCC does not censor. The FCC has no powers whatsoever of any kind to regulate or dictate what can or cannot be shown or said or done on network television. This is absolute.
However.
The license that the individual affiliate stations have, the one that allows them the monopoly over that particular frequency in that particular city, the license that makes them tens or hundreds of millions of dollars a year, possibly the most valuable single piece of paper in the country, comes up for renewal every three years.
The FCC almost never revokes such a license. Even so, the thought that their ticket to untold riches may be taken away from them drives the station owners insane. They want that piece of paper that makes them rich. They want the programming that the network supplies that draws in the viewers that allow them to sell the ads that make them rich. They don’t want anything - anything - that might cause a single viewer to turn away from their station. And they are driven frothy with fear and frustration that they don’t control that programming that comes in from the networks and has such control over their wallets.
The networks have similar fears about offending advertisers, either directly or indirectly through viewer protests. The FCC has no power over networks. None whatsoever. But each networks owns about nine major affiliates, a major source of profit that they don’t like to talk about, and affiliates are what the FCC does have power over. And even the affiliates they don’t own, 99% of whom are in “middle america,” like to scream at them daily about their heathen lib’ral Hollywood/New York sex-laden godless indecent perverted programming. Well, some of their viewers don’t, some of them being very vocal about it. The rest of their viewers like it very much thank you and want it indecenter and perverteder. But they aren’t as vocal about it.
As a result network programming tries to be as edgy as humanly possibly without offending anyone of any sensibility. Hence the numbing of minds.
Cable was supposed to end this nonsense, but of course turned into 500 channels broadcasting the same stuff as the original 5.
What is the FCC’s power then, the power that makes grown station owners wet their pants even though a license is never ever taken away except in the cases of actual mass murder and treason?
They can issue small fines.
In 2006, the limit for fines on “indecency” was raised to $325,000, a big jump from the previous $32,500, but c’mon, we’re talking about companies that net hundreds of millions of dollars. And they won’t pay a cent, since they’ll buck the fine up to the network which issued the original broadcast. Because they can. Admittedly a maximum fine times the 200+ stations affiliated with a major network would run into some real money, except that no such maximum fine has ever been levied.
It’s just that the thought of a fine for indecency makes them wet their pants. Why?
Partly because of this:
This file is essentially a compilation of all the complaints the station has received from the public. The file is legally accessible to any member of the public who wants to see it. (The station may take reasonable steps if you ask, like getting your name and group affiliation and whatnot, but they are not supposed to bar you from it. It used to be a big thing among activists to try to see the file and do massive publicity if their request got turned down, but that was the 60s, man, and I don’t know what goes on today.) If an organized group wants to start a campaign against your station, the public file can bulge into a public set of filing cabinets. And the FCC reviews each and every one of these when it does a license renewal. The FCC can impose various restrictions on a station that are equivalent to probation, so that the station has to walk on tiptoes for the next three years. Because some competitors’ lawyers can walk in and read the public file and tell the FCC, hey, we’d be much better at upholding the public interest than these heathen lib’ral Hollywood/New York sex-laden godless indecent perverted jerks.
So you do not get dirty words on network tv. You do not get nudity. You do not get blasphemy. You keep them blacks off until the times change and then you keep them gays off until the times change. Network tv does not lead culture. It follows it, cringing every step of the way.
That’s why U.S. network television is weird beyond measure and profitable like self-reproducing gold mines. Until the advertising goes away and then it will be blackness everywhere in a matter of days. Nothing on television is done for you. It is all for advertisers. Ratings are not about programs; they exist only to tell advertisers how many potential eyeballs there were for their ads. That’s why time-shifted television doesn’t count. Old advertising is useless advertising. That’s why certain demographics are courted and larger demographics ignored. That’s why everything you find unintelligible about network tv happens. Television exists to show advertising. Everything else is subordinate to and derivative of that fact.
The FCC is completely independent of this notion, legally, fiscally, and morally, and it’s completely independent actions happen to support this notion every single time.
You cannot explain this to anybody outside the system. Inside the system they think of nothing else. Nothing else.
Last week, an episode of The Simpsons was shown on Channel 4 in Great Britain at 6 o’clock in the evening which included the word “shite”, spoken by Groundskeeper Willie (if anyone can tell me which ep it was, I’d be grateful: he was referring to tractors, I think). “Shite” is a pretty well-known variant of “shit”.
You wouldn’t normally hear that word on TV over here before the 9 o’clock “watershed”. I’m guessing that nobody in the US television censorship department recognised it a rude word.
You’d be right. US censors don’t seem to care if its a curse word in another locale/language, as I’ve heard plenty of offensive spanish phrases on TV without a hitch. “Bloody” in the British context is also aired without issue in my experiences, although I’m not sure exactly how powerful of a curse word that is (if it is at all) over in GB…
Such occurrences are commonplace. When Comedy Central ran “Absolutely Fabulous”, they often bleeped contemporary profanity that is understood by American English speakers – for example, “fuck.” But “buggery bolloks” was perfectly OK, … just don’t give the definition to anyone on this side of the pond if you want to be polite.
As a semi-aside, my sister routinely uses “bugger”, she thought it had something to do with cute, little, beetles. Heh. I explained to her it has meant sodomy for 'bout 100 years. She was aghast, she thought it was bowdlerized profanity, not archaic profanity.
But really, no one on this side of the pond is going to raise a major issue with the occasional pushing of the envelope on “The Simpsons.” It’s been around so long, it’s become so much a part of our culture, anyone who complains will be laughed at. Now, “Family Guy”, that one gets picked apart daily by the bible-thumping crowd. I think because, for a variety of reasons, it’s a safer target – it’s newrer, it’s edgier, not as consistantly funny (IMHO, and I do enjoy it), exposes the left-wing more than the Simpsons does, etc.
Like my “The View” example abouve – “they” (whoever cares about such topics) wanted to make a big deal about it, but the show is too well liked by mainstream America for the indignation to propagate properly. Go ahead, say “fuck” on Oprah – no one will ever be able to stop you. I’d enjoy seeing people try. Try to convince advertisers to drop the show. It would be amusing to watch the effort crash and burn.