I've been watching television for almost 19 years now and I know there are a few words that aren't allowed to be used on screen. You can say !@#$%^&*], ass, damn, piss and hell. It's pretty prohibited to say [!@#$%^&*], [!@#$%^&*], [!@#$%^&*], !@#$%^&*], etc. Since when was it passed that the word "dick" can be used on television? In the last 2 weeks, I've heard the word 3 times on various shows. And it's not like they even tried to say it to make it sound like they meant something else. One occasion it was "My character was a real dick." Another was, "You don't have dicks anyway." And the third one was on Next on MTV when the one girl said the guy's dick was probably small. Did this rule just become passed? I always thought "dick" was on the list of what you can't say on television.

Drew, I've noticed that, too! Another word I've heard was "[!@#$%^&*]." I've heard it at least three times on broadcast TV. Syndicated programming but the FCC is the FCC so that really doesn't matter.

It's shocking!!

I am not sure about network television, but I know I read a couple of years back that the FCC doesn't have too much influence on Cable. Someone had written the local newspaper about how shows like Nip/Tuck and Rescue Me were able to get away with so much. The guy that answered the question said that the FCC didn't have much control over stations like F/X which were cable. And that the rules were very relaxed concerning them. A few weeks later someone wrote back and stated that the FCC had evidently come down on Nip/Tuck because the sex scenes had gotten tamer.

The editor wrote back that it was not the FCC that brought about that change but the producers of the show had tamed them down a bit - not wanting to push the limit too far because they had some bigger surprises for later in the season. After seeing the rest of the season after that I am assuming they were talking about the male/male love scene after the surgery of the war veteran.

I remember he alluded to some fans saying they had pushed the limit in some scenes, but even with that it was from fans and not the FCC.

I am just assuming that with the FCC being so much more strict these days on network TV, maybe cable is pushing thier limits and going all out to provide a different area of programming.

I do know that a couple of years back Good Morning America did a story too where the FCC was going to allow certain words now, but I do not remember dick being one of them. The word [!@#$%^&*] is allowed now - only if used in a non-sexual manner. I think they are referring to like being fucked off or something like that.

Wait, "[!@#$%^&*]" is allowed on broadcast nets? I don't think so.

I know they said "[!@#$%^&*]" was allowed 'if the story dictated it.' But that was WAAAAAAAAAAY back in the "Chicago Hope" days when that show made TV history, I believe, by having a doctor say it after a patient died, or some such.

Even if these words aren't allowed on the broadcast nets and affiliates, I'm seeing them seep in. It's a slippery slope...

[!@#$%^&*] was said live on Big Brother last summer when Janelle screamed it to Jennifer and said "PACK YOUR BAGS, JENNY! [!@#$%^&*] YOU!!!!!" And gave her the finger! LOL. Best moment of reality television ever.

They use really racey language on Nip/Tuck.

Doesn't the time of day when the show is screened influence what is allowed? Shows in the late evening have more leeway than daytime...

Even if these words aren't allowed on the broadcast nets and affiliates, I'm seeing them seep in. It's a slippery slope...

So true. Few people actually know that the Soviet Union really collapsed because the censors allowed swearing on television there, and it had little to do with communism or the cold war.

Nudity and profanity air on network televisions in Canada. Shows like The Sopranos and Nip/Tuck air on CTV at 10pm and they're uncut. All they do is put a "Some scenes may not be suitable..............viewer discretion is advised" right before they come back from commercial break.

I think same goes for England and their networks.

It's only a matter of time before the US catches up with the rest of the world.....or not? America is overly sensitive when it comes to nudity and profanity. LOL

Wait, "[!@#$%^&*]" is allowed on broadcast nets? I don't think so.

I know they said "[!@#$%^&*]" was allowed 'if the story dictated it.' But that was WAAAAAAAAAAY back in the "Chicago Hope" days when that show made TV history, I believe, by having a doctor say it after a patient died, or some such.

Even if these words aren't allowed on the broadcast nets and affiliates, I'm seeing them seep in. It's a slippery slope...

Well you can not think so if you want, but that is the rule now. It cannot be used in a sexual sense but can be used in the other sense - just like the way Janelle used it on Big Brother. And like Mike I remember that and it was not bleeped out.

But then the other night James used it when he was taking the cold shower and they did bleep it out. So not sure why BB allowed it at one time but then not at another. Because according to the FCC report on GMA it can be used in the sense that James used it. I remember even one of the reporters saying that "[!@#$%^&*]" has become just a word like "damn" for some people. The way James used it he could have clearly said damn and it would have been okay with the censors too.

Nudity and profanity air on network televisions in Canada. Shows like The Sopranos and Nip/Tuck air on CTV at 10pm and they're uncut. All they do is put a "Some scenes may not be suitable..............viewer discretion is advised" right before they come back from commercial break.

I think same goes for England and their networks.

It's only a matter of time before the US catches up with the rest of the world.....or not? America is overly sensitive when it comes to nudity and profanity. LOL

I know, I'm from Canada and I love how we're free here and a breast is not considered taboo. It annoys me to no end when they bleep so many words on the US channels, like [!@#$%^&*]. Here you can see sex in the middle of the day but violence is less tolerated(wich I agree with), unlike in the US and that boggles my mind

Janet Jackson's boob was shown over and over again and young girls are not having sex earlier or dressing more sexy here than in the US. And we can show a woman breastfeeding on a magazine without freaking out.

Well you can not think so if you want, but that is the rule now. It cannot be used in a sexual sense but can be used in the other sense - just like the way Janelle used it on Big Brother. And like Mike I remember that and it was not bleeped out.

But then the other night James used it when he was taking the cold shower and they did bleep it out. So not sure why BB allowed it at one time but then not at another. Because according to the FCC report on GMA it can be used in the sense that James used it. I remember even one of the reporters saying that "[!@#$%^&*]" has become just a word like "damn" for some people. The way James used it he could have clearly said damn and it would have been okay with the censors too.

Okay, you guys, it's been a while since I've studied this, and yes, things change every day, but I am almost POSITIVE that OF COURSE the "F" word ain't allowed on broadcast TV. Remember, BB is full of amateurs, and perhaps the installment KR referenced was live. Was it? If so, the censors didn't have time to kill it. Think about it.

But then the other night James used it when he was taking the cold shower and they did bleep it out. So not sure why BB allowed it at one time but then not at another. Because according to the FCC report on GMA it can be used in the sense that James used it. I remember even one of the reporters saying that "[!@#$%^&*]" has become just a word like "damn" for some people. The way James used it he could have clearly said damn and it would have been okay with the censors too.

JSF, I did some looking around and this is what I found right off. I was thinking the first issue came up about an Awards show but couldn't remember which. Here is the reference about it from a Yale University website:

from

http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.p...le&sid=1249

So much for George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words?

According to this decision (Complaints Against Various Broadcast Licensees Regarding Their Airing of the Golden Globe Awards Program [PDF]), the use of the word "[!@#$%^&*]" as an adjective in the phrase "this is really, really, [!@#$%^&*] brilliant" by the performer Bono during the last Golden Globe Awards is neither indecent nor obscene. Here is the key paragraph:

As a threshold matter, the material aired during the ?Golden Globe Awards? program does not describe or depict sexual and excretory activities and organs. The word ?[!@#$%^&*]? may be crude and offensive, but, in the context presented here, did not describe sexual or excretory organs or activities. Rather, the performer used the word ?[!@#$%^&*]? as an adjective or expletive to emphasize an exclamation. Indeed, in similar circumstances, we have found that offensive language used as an insult rather than as a description of sexual or excretory activity or organs is not within the scope of the Commission?s prohibition of indecent program content.

Actually, though, the ways in which you determine whether use of a word or phrase is indecent are a bit more complicated. Lots of examples are necessary, and I suggest those interested see this document (In the Matter of Industry Guidance On the Commission's Case Law Interpreting 18 U.S.C. ? 1464 and Enforcement Policies Regarding Broadcast Indecency). Examples include the following, which was indecent:

God, my testicles are like down to the floor . . . you could really have a party with these . . . Use them like Bocci balls.

(As part of a discussion of lesbians) I mean to go around porking other girls with vibrating rubber products . . .

Have you ever had sex with an animal? Well, don't knock it. I was sodomized by Lambchop.

Indecent - Warning Issued.

And examples that aren't indecent:

Announcers allegedly referred to complainant, Chuck Harder, as "Suck Harder,'' "Suck,'' and "Suckie'' throughout the broadcast and called the complainant a "useless piece of crap.'' Also referred to complainant's network, the Sun Radio Network as ''Suck Harder Radio Network.''

Not Indecent.

Good reading.

And here is another reference to the new ruling from a blog which dates the new ruling from the FCC in 2003. I knew it was just a few years ago that the FCC made the ruling. Sorry to burst your bubble JSF, but what I said is true and is supported by other locations too.

From: http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2005/03/fcc_says_privat.html

FCC Says: "Private Ryan, [!@#$%^&*] Yeah!"

It's no surprise that the FCC exonerated ABC's broadcast of Saving Private Ryan. Michael Powell had indicated this ruling was in the works a few months ago, and the decision echoes an earlier FCC ruling about an unexpurgated broadcast of the Spielberg movie in 2002. But with this decision, the FCC has now come full circle in its torrid affair with that "most profane word in the English language" (the FCC's words). As a broadcaster, I'm more confused than ever over where the line is, except that I can now rest assured that if Senator John McCain introduces an academy award-winning Steven Spielberg production about World War 2 on WFMU, our first amendment rights will be protected.

Let's review the recent history of the FCC's love/hate relationship with the F-word:

October 3, 2003: The FCC rules that the word "[!@#$%^&*]" is legal, as long as it's used as an adjective. This was in reference to Bono saying "[!@#$%^&*] brilliant" as he accepted an award during the Golden Globe awards. The FCC's ruling is here. An excerpt:

"As a threshold matter, the material aired during the "Golden Globe Awards" program does not describe or depict sexual and excretory activities and organs. The word "[!@#$%^&*]" may be crude and offensive, but, in the context presented here, did not describe sexual or excretory organs or activities. Rather, the performer used the word "[!@#$%^&*]" as an adjective or expletive to emphasize an exclamation. Indeed, in similar circumstances, we have found that offensive language used as an insult rather than as a description of sexual or excretory activity or organs is not within the scope of the Commission's prohibition of indecent program content."

March 3, 2004: Barely a month after nipplegate, the FCC reverses itself on the initial Bono ruling, going so far as to call it's earlier decision "bad law." The March, 2004 ruling is here. In it, the FCC seemed to be saying that, contrary to it's decision from five months ealier, the F-word was never acceptable on broadcast media. An excerpt:

"We believe that, given the core meaning of the "F-Word," any use of that word or a variation, in any context, inherently has a sexual connotation, and therefore falls within the first prong of our indecency definition... The use of the "F-Word" here, on a nationally telecast awards ceremony, was shocking and gratuitous. In this regard, NBC does not claim that there was any political, scientific or other independent value of use of the word here, or any other factors to mitigate its offensiveness. If the Commission were routinely not to take action against isolated and gratuitous uses of such language on broadcasts when children were expected to be in the audience, this would likely lead to more widespread use of the offensive language.

While prior Commission and staff action have indicated that isolated or fleeting broadcasts of the "F-Word" such as that here are not indecent or would not be acted upon, consistent with our decision today we conclude that any such interpretation is no longer good law. By our action today, broadcasters are on clear notice that, in the future, they will be subject to potential enforcement action for any broadcast of the "F-Word" or a variation thereof in situations such as that here."

Seems clear enough, doesn't it? You can't ever air a [!@#$%^&*], even if it's not used sexually, even if it's just a single "[!@#$%^&*]." No wonder than that 66 ABC television affiliates decided not to air Saving Private Ryan, which contains 21 cases of the F-word.

February 28, 2005: The FCC rules unanimously that Saving Private Ryan is perfectly fine to broadcast, due to it's gritty tale of heroism and personal sacrifice. The ruling is here. "[!@#$%^&*]" is OK as long as it's swaddled in patriotism and it's won an Oscar.

In yesterday's decision, The FCC even went so far as to defend it's sanctioning of Bono:

"The utterance of the word "[!@#$%^&*]" by a performer during the Golden Globe Awards telecast occurred in the context of a live awards program in which use of the word was shocking and gratuitous, where no claim of any political, scientific or other independent value was made, and during which children were expected to be in the audience."

And Michael Powell even weighs in with his own statement:

"Americans are not excessively prudish, only that they are fed up with being ambushed with content at times and places they least expect it."

In its ruling yesterday, the FCC goes on and on about the gritty realism of Saving Private Ryan, describing its plot in great detail, mentioning it's awards, credentials and its gritty portrayal of heroism. The FCC also mentions the number of disclaimers and announcements that were made throughout the broadcast, warning people to stay away, lest one of the 21 "[!@#$%^&*]" leap out and ambush an unsuspecting viewer.

But previously, the Supreme Court had said that such disclaimers were irrelevant if they occured during hours when children might be in the audience, which was clearly the case with Saving Private Ryan, which aired prior to the FCC's 10pm-6am "safe harbor" period. In the 1978 George Carlin "filthy words" case (FCC versus Pacifica), the Supreme Court reinforced the FCC's decision that:

"...if an offensive broadcast had literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, and were preceded by warnings, it might not be indecent in the late evening, but would be indecent during the day, when children are in the audience."

So are disclaimers sufficient to protect the children from F-word ambushes? No. I mean Yes. Is the F-word OK if used as an adjective? Yes. Did I say "yes?" I meant to say "no." What were we thinking? Are 21 "[!@#$%^&*]" OK for World War Two portrayals? Yes. How about the invasion of Grenada? The My Lai Massacre? Abu Ghraib? Only the five members of the FCC know for sure.

Let's hope the rumors floating around FCC circles in Washington, DC are true: that Fox and other big commercial broadcasters will soon be petitioning a US Federal District Court in New York for protection from the FCC's contradictory and capricious decision making.

If you enjoyed reading all about the F-word, then you're sure to enjoy this remix of Madonna's own F-word ambush. (MP3) Madonna's people had planted fake Madonna MP3s on various file sharing networks, and when the unsuspecting downloaders opened the file, Madonna excoriated them with a "This is Madonna. What the [!@#$%^&*] do you think you're doing?" Within hours, there were dozens upon dozens of remixes floating around the web. This was one of them.

As you can see from that last blog entry though, the FCC seems to change it's mind about the ruling constantly.

I knew about the Bono case. But like I said, that was okay'd because it was live television, when the situation couldn't be helped. (We're just saying that as an excuse just for the hell of it since I'm at work and don't care to delve deeper.) Anyway, the same was true for the "Big Brother" telecast, and why the first occurrence probably happened on live TV and couldn't be helped whereas the second one, which was taped, had been bleeped. Again, I'm no expert on these things but as an ex-TV student (which I seem to have temporarily given up for journalism) it doesn't compute that the FCC would okay the F-word just yet. And again, if that were true, we'd be seeing it eeeeeeveerywhere. And God, I should hope it'd spice up the soaps! My whole point is, though the Bono incident was excused, broadcasters know that doesn't mean they can have a free-for-all on the word. It must be used incredibly sparingly and broadcasters only could get away with it if it was a socially redeeming film like "Saving Private Ryan." Otherwise, there's the risk of being fined. My whole point was not just anybody can say it, and that appears to still ring true. Granted, you're clearly right about the FCC ruling in favor of 'f,' but that appears to be a rare exception.

In other words, we're not on the same level as cable, and that's why I reject arguments that say 'the US allows it.' Because until it's always allowed, without question, even if it's on a sitcom or about sex, then it's not allowed.

Nudity and profanity air on network televisions in Canada. Shows like The Sopranos and Nip/Tuck air on CTV at 10pm and they're uncut. All they do is put a "Some scenes may not be suitable..............viewer discretion is advised" right before they come back from commercial break.

I think same goes for England and their networks.

It's in Germany as well. They show a "This show might not be suitable for viewers under the age of 16" warning or something like that. All HBO shows air on free tv, for example Sex and the City aired at 6 pm.

Janet Jackson's boob was shown over and over again and young girls are not having sex earlier or dressing more sexy here than in the US. And we can show a woman breastfeeding on a magazine without freaking out.

Same here.

On the radio, they don't even censor American music. We always get to hear the dirty versions

During Canada's Next Top Model they never bleeped "[!@#$%^&*]" but they bleeped "!@#$%^&*]".

It drives me nuts how they censor SATC, b/c the point and fun of that show is about sex, and dirty words. Especially since they show it at 11pm here on ABC, come on! I know there are parts of Canada where they still censor some stuff, but mostly when it's after 10 pm it's not as censored. I live in the province of Quebec though, and nothing is censored here(cuz we're French). There is a show here called Loft Story(kinda like BB but in French), and it passes at 7pm. They didn't censor all the swear words for a while unitil some parents got mad and made complaints, and at that point I agree. I think before 10 pm bad words should be censored but not breasts, that is natural.