Putting the "F" in FCC

Who do you root for in a case where everyone's motives are misguided at best and disingenuous at worst?

A federal appeals court in New York has ruled that the FCC overstepped it's authority when it fined the FOX network for airing "fleeting expletives" during separate broadcasts of the Billboard Music Awards. The specifics of the case can be found at all the major news sites. What it boils down to is that the FCC got reprimanded for changing it's policy regarding flying-f*&^s without providing adequate justification for doing so.

Let's just assume for a second that any of the seven people who actually watch the Billboard Music Awards on FOX was actually offended. The odds that the thin-skinned viewer actually wrote the FCC? ZERO. Our friendly special interest groups, who believe their taste and judgement trumps everyone else's, employ individuals whose sole job it is to sit and watch TV all day looking for something they can label "offensive". They then jump on these instances and, through the virtue of their mailing list, convince a lot of people who never actually saw the "offensive" moment to complain to the FCC, thus creating a media firestorm which helps them with their primary goal, which is getting their names in the paper. Oh yeah, and there's also that meaningless fine that doesn't really change anything, but that's just icing. The Simpsons did a great parody of this situation in it's recently broadcast 400th episode, using Ned Flanders, of course, as the watchdog viewer.

Based on that premise the court's decision should be considered good news right? Well, not really, and that's because the issue isn't as much about free speech as the networks and studios would like us to think. It's about them being able to use shock-value to generate publicity and viewers when they need to. If you're gonna fine CBS for letting Janet Jackson's breast slip, then you also have to fine CBS News and all the other outlets who aired it ad-nauseum for the following three weeks.

So, when most of the players involved are little more than publicity craving [deleted fleeting expletive]s, the court's ruling feels less like a win for those of us in favor of personal responsibility and more like yet another opportunity for the media whores to turn some tricks.

Unfortunately, in this decorum-less age where we're blistered with f-bombs while simply walking through the mall, live television will always run the risk of a fleeting-expletive here or there. If they really wanted to change the landscape, the networks would pass the cost of their fines along to the actual offenders. If the Bonos, Janet Jacksons, and Nicole Ritchies of the world were stuck with a bill for displaying their lack of tact, then maybe others might pick up a copy of Emily Post now and then.

Post-script: The New York Times take on this was interesting. Apparently, the court based some of their decision on the fact that President Bush and VP Cheney aren't afraid to let the expletives fly in public:

If President Bush and Vice President Cheney can blurt out vulgar language, then the government cannot punish broadcast television stations for broadcasting the same words in similarly fleeting contexts.

But the judges said vulgar words are just as often used out of frustration or excitement, and not to convey any broader obscene meaning. “In recent times even the top leaders of our government have used variants of these expletives in a manner that no reasonable person would believe referenced sexual or excretory organs or activities.”

Adopting an argument made by lawyers for NBC, the judges then cited examples in which Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney had used the same language that would be penalized under the policy. Mr. Bush was caught on videotape last July using a common vulgarity that the commission finds objectionable in a conversation with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. Three years ago, Mr. Cheney was widely reported to have muttered an angry obscene version of “get lost” to Senator Patrick Leahy on the floor of the United States Senate.

Season Finale Highlights and Lowlights

Lots of big doin's in the past week. Here are some of the highlights (and lowlights):

The Simpsons - The finale actually consisted of two unrelated episodes, the second being the series' 400th. The first episode however was my favorite of the two. I love The Simpsons, but I rarely watch the episodes in their first run anymore; I either wait for syndication or the DVDs. However, when I saw they were doing a 24 parody I couldn't pass. This ep was spot on (did I see Jack with his man bag?) and so good in fact that I want more Simpson's episodes in this style. The second episode was good too, if for no other reason than Homer's letting us know that he learned from Fox news that "Mexican gays are sneaking across the border and unplugging our brain-dead ladies". Looking forward to the movie this summer.

The Office - A classic episode, and a great way to end a great season. Michael's going nowhere, Jim's got a date with Pam, and Ryan will now be Michael's boss. His exchange with Kelly after his phone call from corporate was fantastic. As was the barely noticeable comment from CFO David Wallace that the corporate HR guy is kind of a jerk. The table has been set for what should be a hilarious fourth season. My only concern is that NBC has apparently ordered thirty episodes for next season. That's 1/3 more the funny; it may be hard to pull off.

24 - This episode was better than most of it's predecessors this season, but still indicative of the unevenness of this sixth season. It was good to see the return of Jack's man bag, but his final confrontation with his father was a bit of a let down. Plus wasn't it just super-convenient that Audrey's house was only a four minute walk from the spot where Jack jumped off the helo? Lots of stories about the producers hearing our frustration and making some significant changes for Jack's next long day. Let's hope they're true.

Lost - Thank goodness for DVRs. I don't think I would have remained mentally stable (relatively, of course) if I had to wait through each commercial break of what was an especially intense and simultaneously uplifting and browbeating two hours of television. The game has definitely changed, and I didn't really see it coming until Jack was alone in his pad with countless maps of the South Pacific. The only other clue I picked up in my initial watching was how new his cell phone looked, but I thought maybe that was just a prop dept. mistake. What a great episode: action, emotional engagement, a good number of loose ends tied up, and several more laid out. I can't wait to see how the show will reconcile its "new" format with the need to tie up all the other loose ends that still exist. Who's funeral do you think it was nobody showed up for?

Smallville - A little uneven, like the rest of the season. Lana's death was a (self-planned) setup telegraphed by the unnecessary delivery van that passed in front of her right before the explosion. I was really hoping Lois was actually dead and Chloe was going to take over her identity for some reason. I'll be sad if Chloe is really dead, cause the actress is much more likable than the chick who plays Lois. The appearance of the Martian Manhunter and Bizarro was cool, but could have been much better executed. This show never allows for more than five minutes an episode for its climactic scenes, and it usually results in a bit of a letdown, just like...

Heroes - I loved the final episode, right up until the last scene with Nathan jetting Peter off to safely explode in the atmosphere. I don't really care if Nathan's dead, but if they really killed off Peter I may stop watching; it's like killing off Superman in a Justice League scenario. The two episodes leading up to the final had a lot of build up to what was billed as a spectacular confrontation. Well, there was a confrontation, but it wasn't very spectacular, and it lasted less than three minutes. Peter used none of his powers to stop Sylar, instead absorbing Nikki's strength to knock him around until Hiro showed up to deliver the fatal blow. This begs another question. Why couldn't Peter just fly himself away? Why did he need Nathan? Hiro's eventual landing in Ancient Japan is interesting, but like a lot of other viewers I felt a little insulted by how weak a job was done of wrapping things up. This show had a good first season, but I think a lot of that was based on faith. I kept watching, even though I wasn't totally connected with any of the characters, for the promise of what the show could be. It seemed like in the last few episodes it might live up to that potential, but then at the last minute it tripped. I just hope in can pick itself up for season two.