By David G. Savage|April 29, 2009
Reporting from Washington — The Supreme Court said today that TV viewers should not be hit with the "F-word" or the "S-word" during prime-time broadcasts, upholding the government's power to impose huge fines on broadcasters for airing a single expletive.
In a 5-4 decision, the justices said federal law has long prohibited the broadcast of "indecent" language, and they said the Federal Communications Commission had ample authority to crack down on what Justice Antonin Scalia called the "foul-mouthed glitteratae from Hollywood."
He was referring to several incidents that triggered the FCC's crackdown.
When entertainer Cher was given a lifetime achievement award at the Billboard Music Awards, she said it proved her critics wrong. "So, f.... 'em," she said. The broadcast aired live on the Fox network and was viewed by about 2.5 million minors, Scalia said.
The FCC cited similar comments by Bono and Nicole Richie during entertainment industry award shows.
In its new policy, the FCC said a single "fleeting expletive" could trigger fines for the network and all the local broadcasters who aired the show.
Fox and the other networks went to court, arguing that this sudden change in policy was unjustified and unwarranted.
But the Supreme Court upheld the new policy today in FCC vs. Fox Television and confirmed the government retains broad power to police the airwaves.
"The commission could reasonably conclude that the pervasiveness of foul language, and the coarsening of public entertainment in other media such as cable, justify more stringent regulation of broadcast programs so as to give conscientious parents a relatively safe haven for their children," Scalia said.
Although the ruling is a defeat for broadcasters, they can urge the FCC to revise its policy, now that President Obama is appointing new commissioners. They could also urge Congress to revise the applicable law. The court also said the broadcasters can go back to the federal appeals court in New York and argue the policy violates the 1st Amendment.
Andrew Jay Schwartzman, president and chief executive of the Media Access Project, said groups such as his that support a freer policy, would pursue the matter in the courts.
"Today's decision is extremely disappointing," he said. "We remain hopeful that the FCC's restrictive policies will ultimately be declared unconstitutional, but there will be several more years of uncertainty, and impaired artistic expression, while the lower courts address the 1st Amendment issues which the court chose not to confront today."
