[rfu-automation] Re: rfu-automation Digest, Vol 38, Issue 5

[Andrew Ó Baoill]

Jacob & others,

First - thanks for sending around this query.

The FCC rules around obscenity, indeceny, and profanity, are far more  
expansive than merely a concern about fuck and shit, or even the  
traditional 'seven dirty words.' This is something where we have to  
take extraordinary care, as the FCC can - and regularly does - fine  
stations for airing 'indecent' content, and if we were to receive such  
a fine we would probably have to cease operations, as any fine would  
amount to several multiples of our annual budget.

Now, to the matter of what's covered. You might be interested in this  
2001 document from the FCC, which reviewed their then-current policy:
> http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01090.html


Among the most disturbing items, from my perspective, is that they  
note that beeping out indecent language can still leave one open to  
fines, if you don't do so properly, and it's still possible to make  
out what the original word was. So making a good faith attempt to  
comply, but falling short, is not necessarily a defense.

Another thing: in the past few years, as most of you will have heard,  
the FCC has become more strict, not less, in terms of its rules. In  
particular, in the past the Commission had generally treated  
'fleeting' expletives - where they occurred in live programming,  
without pre-meditation, and without an intent to upset or 'pander' -  
as exempt from sanction. That's no longer the case.

Now, the fleeting expletive change doesn't apply to the editing of  
tracks, as recorded music, especially on a loop in our automation  
system, would not fall under that heading, but we can see a general  
trend towards stricter rules and larger fines. The point here: we've  
got to be *very* careful about what we do on air.

The FCC doesn't provide clear rules of 'do' and 'don't' regarding  
lists of words, largely because it would be seen as 'prior restraint'  
and an unconstitutional interference with free speech. However, that  
makes things even more difficult for us, because we've got to engage  
in clairvoyance, guessing what will make Michael Copps wince, and what  
will not. We've had debates on this list previously, and there's been  
dissent, but my view would be as follows:
- When in doubt, leave it out of the automation system
- Consult with the station manager and others before adding content  
you're unsure about to the system
- For your personal programming, bear in mind that your actions could  
endanger the station's license and its future. Again, if in doubt ask  
for guidance and advice.

In this case, I generally agree with Joe's interpretation, though I  
would add that the community standard used by the FCC is not an actual  
local standard, but a notional national standard that exists only  
inside the FCC's imagination. Thus, it's possible that FCC  
commissioners could believe son-of-a-bitch to be a profanity, even if  
no one within our broadcast range would (though, then again, they only  
rule on complaints filed by listeners, so that complaint is taken as  
evidence that at least some people in the area would be offended).

Andrew

On Jun 24, 2009, at 12:00 PM, rfu-automation- 
request at lists.chambana.net wrote:

> From: Joe Futrelle <futrelle at shout.net>
> To: Jacob Barton <udderbot at gmail.com>
>
> I'll give my opinion point by point, but as you are probably aware  
> there's
> no way to know for sure how the FCC would rule on a complaint, which  
> means
> it's a good idea to be conservative and not rely solely on my, or  
> anyone
> else's, opinion.
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Jacob Barton <udderbot at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm looking at a local album submitted to the station recently, &  
>> wonder if
>> certain phrases constitute profanity in RFU's opinion...
>>
>> "the most badassin' coffee in the Northern Hemisphere"
>
>
> Not "so grossly offensive ... as to amount to a nuisance"
>
> "son-of-a-bitch"
>
>
> Slightly more problematic, but I would consider it safe because it's  
> neither
> indecent nor could reasonably (IMO) be described as "grossly  
> offensive" in
> East Central Illinois.
>
> "armed to the tits"
>
>
> Significantly more problematic, I would bleep it because despite it  
> being a
> wonderfully apt metaphor, the word "tits" is generally associated with
> indecent material and so could result in confused listeners  
> complaining and
> the FCC bringing the hammer down.
>
> Your Mileage May Vary.
>
>
>>
>> The way I see it, these aren't on the same level as "shit" or  
>> "fuck" & thus
>> could be aired anytime.  Thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Jacob
>>
>> who doesn't (yet) have radio show, but is summer-employed at the  
>> IMC to
>> help with RFU & Production room stuff...
> -- 
> Joe Futrelle
> Person
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/rfu-automation/attachments/20090622/2d9e5c41/attachment.htm

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/rfu-automation/attachments/20090625/83829349/attachment.htm