Ravenwood - 10/08/03 12:00 AM
U2 front man Bono slipped up and used the F-word at the Golden Globe Awards. Fielding complaints, the FCC has ruled in Bono's favor, reports the AP. I'm not one really care much about "offensive" language, however, I cannot help but smile at the FCC's reasoning.
The FCC, using the F-word more often to explain its decision than Bono did on the air, said the word "may be crude and offensive, but, in the context presented here, did not describe sexual or excretory organs or activities." That distinction is a key test to measure whether a statement meets a federal standard for broadcast indecency.How long before shock jocks and reality shows start working "offensive" words in there under such FCC reasoning? After all, as long as the words are used as an adjective, or do not describe "sexual or excretory organs or activities", it should be ok, right?
David Solomon, chief of the FCC's enforcement bureau, said in the ruling that Bono used the vulgarity as an adjective or to emphasize an exclamation and that "the use of specific words, including expletives or other 'four-letter words' does not render material obscene."
I don't know the original, but to say that ``the fuck'' in ``What the fuck are you doing?'' is adjectival in function is missing the point. It colors the whole sentence, and merely makes a convenience of grammar to fit in.
The reason taboo language is rude is that it makes a social assumption about the relationship between speaker and hearer. When the hearer has not granted that relationship, the language is rude, and for that reason, not because it refers (which it does not) to this or that. Its value, on the other hand, is that it can be used to be rude, when you want to be rude. So every culture has rude words, and their referents are widely different. But you need rude words.
The FCC used to ban it because the audience hadn't granted the necessary relationship and would be offended by stumbling into it. But it has nothing to do with referents. It has to do with a social relationship. If they're arguing that the word refers or does not refer and looking closely at that, they well get nowhere sensible.
Posted by: Ron Hardin at October 8, 2003 6:59 AMI'm of the opinion that the F-word should be used sparingly, that if a person utters or writes it every sentence, or even once a post, it becomes both dull and nails-on-the-chalkboard annoying. And crying wolf - it loses all weight with overuse. Readers yawn.
There so much that can be done with the language, especially in writing, to avoid the use of the word. Then, when it IS suddenly there smacking you in the face, it actually means something.
I've used it once on my blog, when quoting someone else. I wish my speech were that pure and refined..
hln
Posted by: hln at October 8, 2003 8:21 AMI use the f-word a few times a month, with last October and this June standing out as being heavy f-word months. I'm not sure what happened last October, but I hate Junes, so it was no surprise to me.
Posted by: Ravenwood at October 8, 2003 8:52 AMFuckin'-A, bubba.
Posted by: Kim du Toit at October 8, 2003 6:28 PMI suppose you mean "on the blog," on the F-word. I couldn't count the RL utterances, especially at other drivers. I'm not so very eloquent while driving.
hln
Posted by: hln at October 8, 2003 7:41 PMPerhaps Bono got awa y with it because of his politics and conservatives saw it as no big deal. If some conservative talk show host were to drop the "F Bomb" I'm certain there'd be such a hue and cry from the left the FCC would have to take them off the air.
Posted by: Ralph Gizzip at October 8, 2003 8:36 PM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
