Sticks and Stones Motherfucker

Super Bowl XLV has come and gone. The 10% of the population that actually gave a shit about the actual football game got to watch it while having the added benefit of getting to show how much they care about football to the other 90% of the people at the Super Bowl party who were just there to get drunk and eat some fucking chicken wings.


It's telling that the only subject talked about with any real excitement before and after the big game are the multimillion-dollar commercials and the train wreck that is the Super Bowl Halftime Show. I didn't watch the Super Bowl this year so I missed out on all the hype. Although I've been to some pretty sweet Super Bowl parties, I guess I've never really been that interested in any of the actual games. I haven't gotten excited to the point of high fives or a celebratory dance when a team does well and I haven't ever been pissed off when the action on the gridiron isn't going my way. I'll tell you what does piss me off though, the fact that I can't think about the Super Bowl without thinking of Janet Jackson's tit and all the repercussions her "wardrobe malfunction" has had on my right to enjoy obscene, indecent and profane broadcasts in all their glory.

The seven Bureaus and eleven Staff Offices that comprise the Federal Communications Commission are hell bent on winning the war on indecency and protecting our families and most importantly, our children, from the evils of things like the word "fuck" or a middle aged titty flopping out during one of the most viewed television events in America.



The FCC definitions for what is considered obscene, indecent or profane are so vague and subjective that it's got everybody on radio and television too scared to say anything at all that might upset someones sensibilities of what is moral and decent. This is the definition of obscenity outlined on the official government website for the FCC:

Obscene Broadcasts Are Prohibited At All Times

Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be broadcast at any time. The Supreme Court has established that, to be obscene, material must meet a three-pronged test:

• An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;

• The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and

• The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Who the fuck is "an average person? Where do they live? What the hell are "contemporary community standards"? The popularity of Podcasts and Satellite Radio services has skyrocketed in the last five years. It seems most folks would rather hear something genuine and entertaining than tune into some Clear Channel affiliate, broadcasting talk radio hosts and disc jockeys, who have been effectively muzzled by the fear of fines or losing their job because they made one too many fart jokes or didn't clip that F-bomb in time. After Jackson's mammary misstep during Super Bowl XXXVIII the FCC launched a major assault on indecency issuing a record 7.9 million in fines during 2004. The Buggles got it all wrong, video didn't kill the radio star, Janet Jackson's fucking titty did!


It's time for America to stop worrying about "bad" words. America also needs to evolve past this irrational fear of sex and sexuality. If you find something offensive because it depicts or describes activities that provoke your "prurient interest", then change the fucking channel. If you're worried about your children being exposed to something you personally find obscene, indecent or profane then you should spend some time talking with them and encourage them to use their own good judgement when they encounter life's experiences. Pretending that sex doesn't happen and that words will hurt you as badly as sticks and stones, will fuck a kid up 1000 times more than seeing a brief shot of a booby on television or reading the word fuck hundreds of times while perusing Sleeping Horse Pills.

Condensed Timeline of The FCC's Battle Against Indecency

Feb. 23rd, 1927

The Radio Act of 1927 is signed into law giving the Federal Radio Commission the responsibility of regulating US radio communications "as public convenience, interest or necessity requires". Although not allowed to interfere with free speech, the law does state that “No person within the jurisdiction of the United States shall utter any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communications".

Jan. 6th, 1957

For his appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show, cameramen are ordered to shoot from the waist up because Elvis' gyrating pelvis was just too suggestive for t.v.

Jan. 15th, 1967

Rolling Stones agree to change the "objectionable" lyrics "Let's Spend the Night Together" to "Let's Spend Some Time Together" for their appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show.

April 29th, 1987

The FCC revises their definition of indecency to state “material that, in context, depicts or describes sexual or excretory activities or organs in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium".

Sept. 1st, 1995

Infinity Broadcasting pays 1.7 million in fines to the FCC for various violations by Howard Stern. At the time it is the largest cumulative fine for indecency ever paid.

Feb. 1st, 2004

Janet Jackson's nipple results in a $550,000 fine issued to Viacom and an intense crackdown on indecency by the FCC.

June 15th, 2006

President Bush signs the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005 into law. It increases the maximum fine allowed from $32,000 to $320,000.

July 13th, 2010

The Second Circuit court vacates the FCC order and policy based on First Amendment grounds. The court finds that "by prohibiting all 'patently offensive' references to sex, sexual organs, and excretion without giving adequate guidance as to what 'patently offensive' means, the FCC effectively chills speech, because broadcasters have no way of knowing what the FCC will find offensive. To place any discussion of these vast topics at the broadcaster’s peril has the effect of promoting wide self-censorship of valuable material which should be completely protected under the First Amendment".