Radio Censorship Term paper
While the free essays can give you inspiration for writing, they cannot be used 'as is' because they will not meet your assignment's requirements. If you are in a time crunch, then you need a custom written term paper on your subject (radio censorship)
Here you can hire an independent writer/researcher to custom write you an authentic essay to your specifications that will pass any plagiarism test (e.g. Turnitin). Waste no more time!
In 1978 a radio station owned by Pacifica Foundation
Broadcasting out of New York City was doing a program on contemporary
attitudes toward the use of language. This broadcast occurred on a
mid-afternoon weekday. Immediately before the broadcast the station
announced a disclaimer telling listeners that the program would
include "sensitive language which might be regarded as offensive to
some."(Gunther, 1991) As a part of the program the station decided to
air a 12 minute monologue called "Filthy Words" by comedian George
Carlin. The introduction of Carlin's "routine" consisted of, according
to Carlin, "words you couldn't say on the public air waves."(Carlin,
1977) The introduction to Carlin's monologue listed those words and
repeated them in a variety of colloquialisms:
I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss
words and the words that you can't say, that you're not supposed to
say all the time. I was thinking one night about the words you
couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves, um, the ones you definitely
wouldn't say, ever. Bastard you can say, and hell and damn so I have
to figure out which ones you couldn't and ever and it came down to
seven but the list is open to amendment, and infact, has been changed,
uh, by now. The original seven words were shit, piss, fuck, cunt,
cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. Those are the ones that will curve
your spine, grow hair on your hands and maybe, even bring us, God help
us, peace without honor, and a bourbon. (Carlin, 1977)
A man driving with his young son heard this broadcast and reported it
to the Federal Communications Commission [FCC]. This broadcast of
Carlin's "Filthy Words" monologue caused one of the greatest and most
controversial cases in the history of broadcasting. The case of the
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation. The outcome of this case has had a lasting
effect on what we hear on the radio.
This landmark case gave the FCC the "power to regulate radio
broadcasts that are indecent but not obscene." (Gunther, 1991) What
does that mean, exactly? According to the government it means that the
FCC can only regulate broadcasts. They can not censor broadcasts, that
is determine what is offensive in the matters of speech. Before this
case occurred there were certain laws already in place that prohibited
obscenity over radio. One of these laws was the "law of nuisance".
This law "generally speaks to channeling behavior more than actually
prohibiting it."(Simones, 1995) The law in essence meant that certain
words depicting a sexual nature were limited to certain times of the
day when children would not likely be exposed. Broadcasters were
trusted to regulate themselves and what they broadcast over the
airwaves. There were no specific laws or surveillance by regulatory
groups to assure that indecent and obscene material would not be
broadcast. Therefore, when the case of the FCC vs. Pacifica made its
way to the Supreme Court it was a dangerous decision for the Supreme
Court to make. Could the government regulate the freedom of speech?
That was the ultimate question. Carlin's monologue was speech
according to the first amendment.(Simones, 1995) Because of this
Pacifica argued that "the first amendment prohibits all governmental
regulation that depends on the content of speech."(Gunther, 1991)
"However there is no such absolute rule mandated by the constitution,"
according to the Supreme Court.(Gunther, 1991) Therefore the question
is "whether a broadcast of patently offensive words dealing with sex
and excretion may be regulated because of its content. The fact that
society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for
suppressing it."(Gunther, 1991) The Supreme Court deemed that these
words offend for the same reasons that obscenity offends. They also
state that "these words, even though they had no literary meaning or
value, were still protected by the first amendment."(Gunther, 1991) So
what does this mean to the American public? This decision gave
government the power to regulate, whereas it did not before.
Broadcasting, out of all forms of communication, has received
the most limited protection of the first amendment. There are two main
reasons why. First, "the broadcast media have established a uniquely
pervasive presence in the lives of all Americans."(Gunther, 1991)
Airwaves not only confront the public but also the citizen. They can
come into our homes uninvited or, you never know what to expect when
they are invited in. In this case the Court decided that "because the
broadcast audience is constantly tuning in and out, prior warnings
cannot completely protect the listener or viewer from unexpected
program content."(Gunther, 1991) So here's the simple solution, turn
off the radio. How hard can that be? It's not too difficult but the
Supreme Court decided "to say that one may avoid further offense by
turning off the radio...is like saying that the remedy for assault is
run away after the first blow."(Gunther, 1991)
The second reason why broadcasting has received limited first
amendment protection is because "broadcasting is uniquely accessible
to children, even those too young to read."(Gunther, 1991) Even though
children at a young age can't read obscene messages, the Carlin
broadcast could have enlarged a child's vocabulary in a matter of
seconds. These two important factors of broadcasting gave the Supreme
Court the push they needed for regulation. The Court decides that "the
ease with which children may obtain access to broadcast material,
coupled with the concerns recognized, amply justify special treatment
of indecent broadcasting."(Gunther, 1991) But does that mean that
adults have to listen to what is fit for children's ears? Must adults
now go out and purchase George Carlin's album for entertainment? This
decision might not seem a fair one to most who agree with Carlin's
message, but according to the Supreme Court it "does not violate
anyones first amendment rights."(Gunther, 1991)
If the government could allow this type of speech to be
regulated then they must also take into account that regulating
indecent speech would effect many other integral parts of
broadcasting. For instance, "these rationales could justify the
banning from radio a myriad of literary works...they could support the
suppression of a good deal of political speech, such as the Nixon
tapes; and they could even provide the basis for imposing sanctions
for the broadcast of certain portions of the bible."(Gunther, 1991)
Carlin's monologue was speech, there is no doubt about that, and it
does present a point of view. Carlin tried to show that "the words it
uses are "harmless" and that our attitudes toward them are essentially
silly."(Gunther, 1991) They did not object to this point of view but
did object to the way in which it is expressed.
Many people in the United States do not deem these words as
offensive. In fact many people use these words daily and as a part of
conversation. "In this context the Court's decision could be seen as
another of the dominant culture's inevitable efforts to force those
groups who do not share its mores to conform to it's way...
MLA Style
. EssayMania.com. Retrieved on 24 May, 2012 from
<http://essaymania.com/142585/radio-censorship>
More College Papers
Computers And Marketing essay
Computers and Marketing
Marketing is the process by which goods are sold and purchased. The aim of marketing is to acquire, retain, and satisfy customers. Modern marketing has evolved into a complex and diverse field. This field includes a wide variety of special functions such as advertising, mail
Children Of A Lesser God essay
The movie Children of a Lesser God can be best described as a love story that deals with barriers in basic communication. It is a story based on a play about a talented teacher for the deaf named James, who forms an interest in a deaf employee named Sarah, who works for the same school. His job is
The Freedom Of Choice essay
The Freedom of Choice
The right of a woman to have an abortion has been given by the courts by supporting the constitution. Yet people still slander people who are going into the clinics. They use deception as well as confusing language to appeal to peoples emotion, which is a fallacy in argument