Court Tells FCC to Go Cheney Itself

by emptywheel

Will try to do a blizzard of posts on all the big news today (Jefferson, Gitmo, and so on). But for now, I did want to point to this ruling:

If President Bush and Vice President Cheney can use vulgar language, then the government cannot punish others for doing the same thing on television.      

That, in essence, was the decision today when a federal appeals court struck down the government policy of fining stations and networks that broadcast programs with profanity.

The decision, by a divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York, was a sharp rebuke for the Federal Communications Commission and for the Bush administration. It was a major victory in a legal battle being waged by the four television networks — Fox, CBS, NBC and ABC — that had filed the case.

[snip]

But in striking down the commission’s interpretation, the appeals court noted that “in recent times even the top leaders of our government has used variants of these expletives in a manner that no reasonable person would believe referenced sexual or excretory organs or activities.”

Sounds logical to me. If Cheney can tell Pat Leahy to fuck himself, then Bono can say fuck on the air.

Just in time for me to renew my campaign to get someone to draw an analogy, in print, to the treatment of Clinton's consensual blow job as compared to Libby's deliberate outing of a CIA spy.

Comments

[Woodhall Hollow]

Thanks for the laugh EW!

So I would guess that this will open up quite a floodgate of profanity on some radio/tv stations who will not cut off a caller of forgets herself and says "shit!" And when Dobson et al get their undies in a bundle about the lack of decency in US culture, we can all blame it on Cheney!

[Tom in AZ]

Go Marcy!

Just something to tide us over, huh?

[P J Evans]

People with common sense in government!

Wanna bet that it gets appealed to Roberts, Alito, and Thomas?

[William Ockham]

I think this is a positively brilliant decision.

[hauksdottir]

The Court doesn't say that it approves of repetitive vulgarity as a substitute for the richness of an extensive vocabulary. It does apply the law fairly, though.

If Cheney curses and McCain curses and Bush curses (all professional well-educated authoritative men) and they are neither fined nor reprimanded, then they can't really punish others without coming across as hypocritical. Given the number of preachers who engaged in sex of all sorts, gambling, drugs, etc., it is quite probable that they have used the word in question, too.

After we have leaders who restore their own moral and ethical authority, we'll have some high ground for condemning the actions of others.

Furthermore, Americans deserve to know when their leaders spew foul language... casually or in the heat of the moment... without the politeness of bleeping or editing. When Bush gives the finger to reporters, they need to publish his contempt and jeers just as they cover his photo-ops.

[orionATL]

my wife read me this decision this morning. we shared a good laugh.

i can't think of a better way to illustrate what "free" speech is about,

and how difficult speech "guidelines" are to establish and maintain in an open society.

i've no problem with a society or a culture saying they will not support certain vulgar speech, but i prefer it be handled as in the don imus matter.

not by law or fiat but by economic and social pressure, where sufficient consensus and pressure exists.

[freepatriot]

And the men who hold high places

must be the ones who start

to mold a new reality

closer to the heart

Neil Pert

raise your hand if you think george is one of those men ...