The current FCC case [PDF
] before the U.S. Supreme Court presents a fascinating dilemma for the judges: how do you respectfully discuss the legality of profane words in the nation's highest court
? And for reporters: how do you report on the specifics of the case? It seems decisions vary across publications: NYT
, Washington Post
(reg req), LA Times
, Wall Street Journal
, The Atlantic
. As for the judges themselves, they opted to allow only substitute terms
. PDF transcript
with word count at bottom. Background
Screw Howard Stern
. But Save Sandra Tsing Loh
The radio culture wars have claimed an unlikely victim, and an unlikely victimizer (America's favorite NPR station, KCRW).
Your tax dollars at work. The Republican congress
and the FCC
, who evidently have nothing better to do
, want to waste time banning the word fuck
from all radio and broadcast television.
This is really, really f------ brilliant.
The FCC says
the f-word is OK on network TV, as long as it doesn't refer to the sexual act. Naturally, some groups
don't like dirty talk. Is this a sea change in the level of discourse, or is the FCC finally acknowledging that it's useless to protect kids from our favorite four-letter word?
(Second link is a .pdf file.)