Bozell Column: Hollywood's Snotty Day In Court
It was symbolically perfect that on the same day Hollywood went to the Supreme Court to make the case for broadcast profanity, Entertainment Weekly reported that the next showing of the ABC smutcom “Modern Family” would feature a two-year-old girl dropping the F-bomb. The episode’s title will be “Little Bo Bleep.”
Shameless. There’s no other way to describe the people running these networks. We’re told “It might be the first time in a scripted family broadcast TV series where a child has said the F-word.” But it won’t be the last – especially if the high court grants Hollywood’s demands and shreds any regulation of nudity or profanity on TV.
The most telling exchange in the oral arguments came when Justice Stephen Breyer told former Clinton solicitor general Seth Waxman, who represents ABC, that he couldn’t find Hollywood’s idea of what they wanted the content regulations to be.
It is because, as Waxman admitted, they suggested no standard. “In our brief, we don’t suggest what the rule should be, because (A) it’s not our burden; (B) it’s not yours; and (C) there are any number of options.” Who’s going to implement the options Mr. Waxman suggests if it’s no one’s burden to do so? What Hollywood really wants is to shred the 1978 decision in FCC vs. Pacifica Foundation that insisted on a decency regime from 6 am to 10 pm.
“It’s not our burden.” The TV networks don’t want to be held accountable by anyone for what they broadcast. They’re not arguing that regulation is unnecessary because they already provide a glorious safe haven for children. They argue that it’s unfair to discriminate against the broadcast networks because cable and satellite television are smutty. So why not let everyone race to the gutter? Their utter shamelessness is transparent, as they stand before the Supreme Court justices insisting the Founding Fathers in some sort of time warp would protect the networks’ First Amendment right to televise Paris Hilton swearing like a sailor in the nude in front of Thomas Jefferson’s children.
Carter Phillips, the lawyer arguing on behalf of Fox Television, said that the FCC's policies suddenly became “dysfunctional” in 2004, when "thousands and thousands" of complaints began streaming in to the FCC.
What’s dysfunctional wasn’t Janet Jackson getting her bra ripped off during the Super Bowl halftime show in front of millions of children. What’s dysfunctional wasn’t Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie swearing at an awards show on Fox in a clearly pre-scripted bit of profanity. What wasn’t dysfunctional was “NYPD Blue” showing a young boy walking in on a nude woman in his bathroom. What was dysfunctional was letters of protest sent from Idaho and Texas and Ohio.
This is their standard of corporate responsibility: We have none, and we resent that someone would send a letter to Washington insisting that we do.
Team Obama deserves some credit. Even though their FCC under Julius Genachowski is a paper tiger with the TV “tastemakers,” Solicitor General Donald Verrilli did defend the current FCC policies in court. He effectively pointed out that broadcasters want to have it both ways.
“The spectrum licenses they have are worth billions and billions of dollars. Spectrum is staggeringly, staggeringly scarce, and they’re sitting on an enormously valuable resource which they got for free,” he noted. “Then they have a statutory benefit of ‘must carry,’ which gets them on cable systems automatically, and a further statutory benefit of preferred channel placement.” And yet, despite all this favoritism from Congress, these billionaire sultans of sensationalism are complaining about the government. Yes, somehow, they’re unfairly picked on by red-state grandmas on a fixed income who write letters.
Perhaps the worst thing to recognize in these oral arguments is just how lawyers like Phillips can argue fiercely against reality. Justice Samuel Alito asked: If Hollywood were free to broadcast without FCC meddling, might we see streams of expletives and parades of nudity?
Phillips replied: “Not under the guidelines that Fox has used consistently from 10 pm until 6 am.” Ahem. Not only does Fox display no identifiable “guidelines” on taste at any hour, it doesn’t broadcast any shows after 10 pm. Fox stations air late news at 10 pm.
The Supreme Court should stay the course with the FCC. No one should expect Hollywood to improve. But at least there’s still a threadbare expectation that Hollywood should try and behave when children may be watching.
- Brent Bozell's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Is the word going to be
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 9:11am.
Is the word going to be bleeped out? Or is this the start of it being used all over network TV?
Because there's a difference. If it's bleeped out, it's a story well known to any parent: the first time a toddler repeats an unacceptable word that was picked up from the parents, and I don't see anything wrong with that.
If the kid is actually going to say the word right out in the open, that's a whole other thing.
They say "it's not audible"
Submitted by Tim Graham on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 9:34am.
They want the thrill of the F-bomb without the regulatory consequences. Brent's point is they're constantly trying to shred the notion of decency, even as they argue in court that they're really responsible citizens who can engage in self-regulation.
Sorry, Tim, I can't get all
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 9:46am.
Sorry, Tim, I can't get all bent out of shape over this. As I said, it's every parent's nightmare. Coming out of the airport one time I said "Oops, I think I took the wrong exit." And my 3-year-old granddaughter in the back seat said "$h!t!" I said to my DIL "Did she say what I think she said?" and she said, "Yea, I have to watch it, she picked it up from me."
Now I'm assuming the toddler doesn't actually speak the word, right? That would be out of bounds.
But in the premiere episode of Tim Allen's new series "Last Man Standing," the exclamation of choice, spoken at least 3 times by various characters was Mother-F....ather!!
Frankly, I found that more offensive. I haven't watched the show since.
Mother
Submitted by ricklail on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:11am.
A little boyu and girl decided one morning to drop the new words they had heard onto their mom. The mother asked the girl what she wanted for breakfast. The little girl answered give me some of those damn cornflakes. The mom popped her on the butt and sent her to her room. The little boy was ask what he wanted. The boy replied, you can beat your sweet ass I don't want none of them damn cornflakes. Lewis Grizzard
Tinseltown's still mad at Kevin Martin
Submitted by Tim Graham on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 9:39am.
It’s important to notice that the TV networks are still complaining about what the Federal Communications Commission found during the Bush administration. There are no FCC indecency decisions to litigate under Barack Obama. The networks are clearly looking ahead to the next administration and the next FCC appointees, because they can’t be afraid of their liberal friends that are currently in charge.
Carter Phillips said that the FCC's policies suddenly became “dysfunctional since 2004.” Everything went wrong only when "thousands and thousands" of complaints came in so that "the whole system has come to a screeching halt because of the difficulty of trying to resolve these issues."
Wrong. FCC enforcement came to a “screeching halt” because Barack Obama was elected. Phillips is complaining that it’s unfair that the American people were allowed to send complaints to Washington about Hollywood, and that for a brief period in the Bush years, someone at the FCC actually tried to enforce (however inconsistently) a standard of decency.
Tim
Submitted by John Francroix Jr on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:10am.
Any chance the FCC finally got tired of catering to the PTC, where the primary number of complaints received by the FCC were initiated?
And exactly who do you expect
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:19am.
And exactly who do you expect to be complaining about the trash on TV...liberals?
Yeah, if only those complaints came from liberals, they'd do something about it.
Too bad the PTC doesn't realize their complaints are having the opposite effect from what they want.
You are totally right MB
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:25am.
If more complaints came from libs they would listen more. On a side note the president of the PTC Tim Winfer is a democrat.
Yes, and we'll see that
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:45am.
Yes, and we'll see that avalanche of complaints from liberals about profanity and vulgarity on TV, starting on the second Tuesday of next week.
John Francroix's implication that the PTC brought this about by their constant complaints is stupid rationalization.
I'll bet.
Submitted by John Francroix Jr on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:39am.
It's somewhat deceiving to mention complaints against the FCC without mentioning this website's relationship with the PTC.
WHAT??????
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:55am.
You think Bozell is trying to keep it a secret???? That's rich!
From the MRC website
In 1998, Mr. Bozell founded and was the first president of the Parents Television Council, the largest group in America dedicated to a restoring responsibility to Hollywood.
But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your wacky conspiracy theory!
settle down
Submitted by John Francroix Jr on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:04am.
Is every reader of this article going to understand that the author's own organization is responsible for those thousands and thousands of mass organized complaint filings with the FCC?
settle down
Submitted by John Francroix Jr on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:06am.
Is every reader of this article going to understand that the author's own organization is responsible for those thousands and thousands of mass organized complaint filings with the FCC?
Probably not everyone
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:15am.
But he has hardly kept it a secret and any regular on this board knows his views on this type of thing.
It's not necessary to know
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:21am.
It's not necessary to know that the person writing the article was affiliated with the PTC. Bozell can certainly agree with them even if he weren't. To imply some kind of deception on his part is just plain pointless.
Hmmm,
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:46am.
You bring up the straw man, but MB's the one that needs to settle down?
I imagine that the multiple question marks were more from surprise than outrage. I mean, really???
Let them police themselves
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:22am.
This decision really puts network tv at a competitive disadvantage. Why not just meet somewhere in the middle?
Allow profanity and more edgy programs after 10 pm. I am sure many folks will not have a problem with that especially with the invention of the DVR.
Really looking forward to the Golden Globes and Ricky Gervais skewering Hollywood elitists. Hopefully this decision will not make him tone it down.
We are talking about Modern Family?
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:41am.
This is a show about an extended family that includes an older father with a hot young trophy wife and her fat little nerd kid; his daughter who has totally emasculated her husband, brother and most of her kids; his gay son, who is more of a lady than his sister, and who is 'married" to his fat slob gay lover, and they have "adopted" a trophy child from some Shiitehole of a country that exports kids; right?
So why would it be out of line for the kid to drop the F-bomb?
If I had to grow up in a family like that and have two "queens" for parents, I'd probably be saying that or worse everyday!
It is definitely the future of Obama's America.
I only saw the first couple
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 1:56pm.
I only saw the first couple of episodes back when it started and, while it was funny, something seemed off. Maybe it was what you pointed out; I hadn't thought of it that way. That makes the show really creepy. What a messed up family!
How sad.
Submitted by Janey on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 3:02pm.
I can't believe you could actually watch this show and come away with such an angry, distorted appraisal.
Modern Family is one of the sweetest family shows to come along in years. The relationship between the older father and his "hot young trophy wife" has been explored pretty well, and it has been revealed that there is real love between the two. I think the way she put it was that when she met him she "had finally met her match" meaning - in case you don't understand - a strong enough personality to handle her. The son you dismissed as a "fat little nerd kid" is a very deep, thoughtful and kind child.
The daughter who you say "has totally emasculated her husband" is someone who struggles with her need to control in practically every episode. It's portrayed as a character flaw, not celebrated. Her husband is the ultimate family man - a hard working, good provider who wants nothing more than to be surrounded by his wife and children. Sorry you think that's a sign of emasculation.
As for the gay couple and their adopted child, well, I can understand people disapproving of this type of relationship. But to use words like "more of a lady", "fat slob" and "trophy child from some Shiitehole of a country that exports kids" is crass and juvenile. There actually are people in the word who think adopting a child is a GOOD thing, no matter where the child comes from.
I also don't understand Mr. Bozell calling the show a "smutcom". Apparently he hasn't seen it either.
how are the ratings?
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 4:34pm.
I haven't seen it so its hard for me to criticize.
"crass and juvenile"
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 4:33pm.
Have we met, Janey? Most people don't call me that until I've known them for a few days.
I must say that I admire how thoroughly you analyse your TV shows. Do you ever just watch a comedy and laugh at what is being said and done without trying to "understand" all of the meaning and motivation behind it.
I recommend the Three Stooges for starters.
F-Bomb
Submitted by jayhuf on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 10:51am.
My wife is a kindergarten teacher. She tells me kids drop all kinds of profanities w/o knowing what they are saying. Happens all the time. They hear it at home and repeat it. Much ado about nothing.
Yes but
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:17am.
As a parent you would not want your young children to hear that word right? As parents it is our job to monitor what our kids watch
Exactly! That's the point of
Submitted by BosTarus on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 3:34pm.
Exactly! That's the point of the episode-it's going to be all about how the parents react and deal with their daughter dropping the f-bomb. It's not going to be "celebrating" child profanity-but addressing the very real situation of what a parent does when their toddler says something he/she shouldn't.
GubRmint ~ Answer ?????
Submitted by donabernathy on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 11:35am.
How fortunate for governments that people do not think. There is no thinking except in giving and executing commands. If it were otherwise human society could not exist - Adolf Hitler
roflmao
There has got to be a minimum standard...
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 12:12pm.
...that everyone (mostly) can agree to. To have the individual broadcasters police themselves is too much like the proverbial fox guarding the hen house. With what we have seen already coming out of the "entertainment" industry, these troglodytes cannot be trusted with the moral responsibility of upholding decency. (Yes, shawn, they ARE responsible for what goes on TV.)
I'm all for less government intrusion, but I also believe that one of the primary roles of government is to protect its citizens from real harm. One could argue if an occasional profane remark is "real harm", but that's another debate that I would have to ponder on at another time.
What I'm saying is that there has to be some kind of minimum standard. Here in Canada, we have the CRTC (Canadian Radio and Telecom Commission - a federal government agency) which is much like your FCC, but we also have the CBSC -- the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council, which is a board of Canadian broadcasters - both TV and Radio, public and private. Members of the CBSC agree to a certain standard that broadcasters must adhere to. It's mostly self-regulating -- broadcasters regulating broadcasters.
Membership in the Council is technically voluntary, but good luck trying to obtain a license if you are not a member. I for one am aghast as to what is being interpreted as "standards" these days, but the point is, at least we have a standard.
"There... Are... Four... Lights!"
I have a question for you canuck
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 12:23pm.
This is not about ptotecting children for you because you also support censorship of Dexter which is on a pay channel
Why does it bother you what. ADULTS ARE WATCHING?
We are the ultimate censors, folks
Submitted by Mary Louise Turner on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 12:38pm.
The reason that the nutworks want to ditch indecency standards is very simple. Their audiences are going to cable/satellite TV or the Internet. In order to compete with the raw sewage on the Net or cable, the nutworks feel that it's time to pepper their shows with profanity, nudity and violence.
While it is a revolting development, we can fight back. We are the ultimate censors, and we can simply turn the TV or computer off and read books!
So am I mistaken or are they
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 2:03pm.
So am I mistaken or are they going to have the kid actually say the word? Even if it is bleeped, since when does a "family" show have it in the script that a child swears!? If this is allowed, then more shows in the future are going to push the envelope further and in different ways. I won't be surprised if one day swearing, extreme violence, and even sexual content are commonplace on "children's" shows. *sigh*
Modern Family -- very funny
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sat, 01/14/2012 - 5:33pm.
Modern Family -- very funny show. Hilarious, actually.
Not for everyone obviously, I know. But I like it.
However I don't recall hearing one profanity uttered in three seasons in any episode -- and I am listening.
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Let me get this straight
Submitted by Ghostbuster on Sun, 01/15/2012 - 7:14pm.
Let me get this straight, do you guys actually believe that the child actress is going to be saying the word, and that the word will be heard on the show? You do realize that TV isn't real, right?
The child actress need not actually be saying the word. There will be a bleep and the swear word will be implied. No one actually says the word, no one at home actually hears the word, and the story moves forward. A story about something that many parents have faced in real life, a child repeating something they should not.
Some of you need to grow up and stop feigning offense at everything like a bunch of liberals. Disgusting behavior.
Is it safe to assume you all
Submitted by BosTarus on Mon, 01/16/2012 - 3:36pm.
Is it safe to assume you all have the same qualms about A Christmas Story? Which has virtually the same plot point.