Call the FCC?
During the first quarter of the New Orleans Saints-Philadelphia Eagles playoff game, the Fox broadcast lingered on a young lady wearing a t-shirt bearing the phrase "F*ck da Eagles" (albeint without the asterisk). Now I'm no expert on indecency law, but if Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction was an issue, wouldn't this be as well? [to be clear, I'm not defending the FCC's standards. I'm just wondering about the consistency of their application.]
UPDATE: I've correct the post ("da" instead of "the").
Related Posts (on one page):
- Call the FCC? - Update:
- Call the FCC?
It's funny you should mention this because on CSPAN a FCC lawyer was arguing some case and the Judge said, "F*ck", describing how indecency standards are partly determined by their use for shock value. Well that shocked the sh*t out of me to hear that in CSPAN.
I'm not sure why American youth (unlike European youth who see them on TV all the time on TV and drink alcohol at age 16) are presumed to be vulnerable to areolas. But according to my government they are dangerous. Need I ask more?
Eagles fans don't count in that calculus, of course, because we all know they're mindless drones--not human beings. :)
The problem with that is that it was a replay. That was a live shot. Couple that with the fact that, as far as I know, all NFL games are still broadcast on a seven-second delay, and it sure seems to me like FOX had all kinds of time to catch that.
That's supposed to say, "That was not a live shot."
I think the failure to use the appropriate article was certainly worth sanction.
What interested me, also, is how she was let in the stadium. My guess is she had something on over the shirt.
(I'd be more outraged over the shirt had I not attended many sporting events in Philadelphia, where the ushers threw out troublemakers, like when some guy shouted profanites at and deliberately spilled beer on the guy in the Mets hat. At least when they threw him out, they let him keep his Mets hat.)
--JRM
That makes it patently different from the JJ thing (although I don't support fines in either case on different grounds) since she was the center of attention, as it were and the network ought to actually be paying attention to what she is and isn't showing.
It is, rather, grammatically speaking, in its entirety, an epithet.
As such, it has no referent.
It thus escapes the FCC's categories, which as I recall had adverbs and adjectives pretty well confused already.
ref: Quang Phuc Dong, ``English Sentences without Overt Grammatical Subject,'' _Studies Out In Left Field : Defamatory Essays Presented to James D. McCawley on the Occasion of His 33rd or 34th Birthday_, Zwicky et al. eds., 1971
Actual and live and human all at once? Good God!
Would a "Fuck da Eagles" T-shirt be legal to wear on the street? (With enough other clothing to conceal one's naughty bits, of course!)
Indecency NALs are driven entirely by complaints. The FCC, as well as various advocacy and political groups, make it very easy to file a complaint. The FCC requests, but does not require, a recording of the program. They do not legally need a recording in order to act upon and enforce a complaint.
Sometimes the FCC does order a complaint dismissed, or sometimes they just don't bother to act on a complaint.
The entire process is driven by political expediency and pressure, just like all other sumptuary laws have been enforced historically.
Does no one have time for "plain meaning" anymore?
Put differently, if I said "f*ck you" to you, would you assume the verb had no referent? (Please note: I'm not actually cursing at anyone.)
No, that's why you need linguists. It doesn't do the things that imperatives do. Consider embedding in other contexts. (*) means doesn't work :
I said to close the door.
(*)I said to fuck the Eagles.
Don't close the door.
(*)Don't fuck the Eagles.
Please close the door.
(*)Please fuck the Eagles.
Close the door, won't you?
(*)Fuck the Eagles, won't you?
Go close the door.
(*)Go fuck the Eagles.
Close the door or I'll stop your allowance.
(*)Fuck the Eagles or I'll stop your allowance.
Close the door and I'll give you a dollar.
(*)Fuck the Eagles and I'll give you a dollar.
Close the door and wash the dishes.
(*)Fuck the Eagles and wash the dishes.
It has, in short, no internal hooks that other grammatical structures can use, unless you mentally let the ``fuck'' revert to another meaning that it fails to have in the epithet.
Which proves it doesn't have that meaning in the epithet.
Second, there is a broadcast delay of several seconds which is a marked annoyance when I get sick of the broadcasters and try to listen on radio while watching the game. They also have a delay but they are usually two to three seconds ahead of the picture
Lastly, as to whehter this shirt referred to a sexual act, while in college, an elderly and very prim appearing professor of Political Science and Constitutional Law walked into class and said she just saw a sign that said
Fuck the University
She said she was appalled as it would obviously be impossible for this one person to fuck the entire University
Yes, so disgusting that more people googled that clip than googled the twin towers falling. I guess everyone just had to see it for themselves....
1. He didn't grap her breast.
2. Only a small part of her nipple was visible; it wasn't a "naked breast."
3. You couldn't even really see it unless you watched the slo-mo replay on your Tivo or online, as millions did.
LOL I was watching that halftime show on a decent-sized TV and didn't even notice what happened. I guess I wasn't paying as close attention as Mr. Schlafly.
If the young lady in question had a t-shirt reading "Fuck the Draft," I wonder if Fox might have a First Amendment argument? And why should the draft, which has as its aim the defense of our nation, enjoy less protection from criticism than a perennially choking team like the Eagles?
As for community standards, if we go by New Orleans standards, the shirt is not only well within those standards, it captured perfectly the spirits of just about every New Orleanian yesterday.
-- The Eagles
It is, rather, grammatically speaking, in its entirety, an epithet.
Indeed, it can hardly be seen as an imperatve -- she was not hoping/commanding that the Eagles be given sexual benefits, I assume (there is a small possibility that she was an Eagles fan and exhorting her fellow fans to provide them comfort and incentive, but I doubt it).
As I recall from speech therapy classes decades ago -- a human can lose the ability to speak in a condition known as aphasia, often caused by a stroke. They can still move their mouth, etc., but memory of what words mean is lost, and they have to relearn language again, first to speak and then to read.
In many cases it is a partial loss, and in many some part of language memory returns as the brain heals and re-wires. In the latter case the first memories to return are profanity. The theory is that it is not symbolic, not "a set of sounds means an object." Instead, like "ouch," "oof," or laughter, it is simply a sound that reflects a state of mind, presumably hard-wired at a simpler and deeper level.
The Prof. told of seeing an old man in a wheelchair struggling with his first word, repeatedly crying out "shit!" as the nurses cheered and encouraged him.
Kovarsky,
That's nothing compared to the new three-chairs-in-front-of-a-low-table format of their "news" shows, obviously meant to provide viewers with the maximum number of crotch-shots of the female hosts and guests.
I would be interested to see the clip without slow motion.
I've correct the post ("da" instead of "the").
Best correction I've seen since an early-18th-c. Handel sonata print that boasted it was "more Corect" than the old edition.
As the Bald Eagle Artificial Insemination Team's resident Emergency Medical Tech, I hope not. I'm tired of climbing mountains with a backpack full of blood, bandages, and splints.
Not that anybody cares, but FCUK.
And I'm predicting a Playboy appearance for the lass in the clip.
This is not to say that I believe that the words "FUCK DA EAGLES" on a t-shirt are the worst thing in the world, but the FCC certainly would not approve and it would have been in Fox's interest to keep that fan's shirt off camera.
This reminds me of what Mae West said: "I'm the lady who works at Paramount all day and Fox all night."
Right, and the University of Maryland is so greatly embarrassed for the vulgar chanting by its fans when Duke plays in Cole field house that UofMD's basketball coach has had to apologize for it and the school has contemplated ejecting the most offensive from the premises. No serious "free speech" issues in this any more than there are in the offensive racist and anti-semitic taunting of opponents by certain European soccer teams' fans.
I trust you are not proud of this. As one who always roots for the Terps over the Blue Devils, I certainly am not.
I don't know if you should be ashamed of the chants and other antics of the Maryland fans, but shouldn't you be ashamed of being a Maryland fan in the first place?
Go Duke
That second bit of info was, um, not surprising.
Are you kidding me? If not, how do you get a job like that? And why?
Have you actually seen those shirts? They reason I stopped wearing French Connection clothing is exactly the opposite of the one you're thinking -- they are cut... uh... well, "metrosexual" would be a generous choice of wording.
And I can't say I'm proud of some of the absolute extremes of our fan behavior (nor do I think my comment implied that?), but the media and the school have also overreacted somewhat, especially vis-a-vis the so-called "rioting." There hasn't been a real riot here since the NCAA tournament win, which was before my time, but the administration wants to label any large outdoor fan celebration a "riot."
Truly amazing that someone is making a living on junior high level humor.
FYI though, that is fineable under the new FCC rules. A 'fleeting expletive' that wasnt even planned by the network is prohibited, and Id say thats essentially what this was. It was like Nicole Richie saying "fuck" live at the Golden Globes one year, which is one of the reasons the Networks took the FCC to court.
It is, rather, grammatically speaking, in its entirety, an epithet.
I can buy that in the phrase "Bucky Fucking Dent" but not here.
(*) means doesn't work :
I said to close the door.
(*)I said to fuck the Eagles.
Why doesn't it work?
Does "Kill the Eagles" work? "Beat the Eagles"? "Humiliate the Eagles"?
"Fuck you" is incorrect -- the reflexive "Fuck yourself" ought to be used, or the passive "Get bent". (In Amish that's rendered "Fornicate thyself".)
And don't forget the blonde newlywed who one December invites the mail carrier into her home, takes him up to the bedroom, and gives him the screwing of his lifetime. Then as he's leaving she says "Wait!" and gives him a dollar. He says "What's that for?" and she says "That's what my husband said to do. He said to leave five dollars for the paperboy, and when I said 'What about the mailman?' he said 'Fuck him, give him a dollar.'"
It is, rather, grammatically speaking, in its entirety, an epithet.
In this instance, it could also be read as a verb in the sense that "to fuck someone" can mean to deny them of something they perhaps deserve. For example, "the refs fucked the eagles on that play" is not an epithet and is not a reference to fornication.