m I indecent? Actually, are the things I say and write about indecent? I do not think so, but over the years, I have received numerous e-mails from other people who would tell me otherwise.
But that’s okay. That’s part of the give and take of a society where free speech is a right, not a privilege.
What concerns me, though, and what I would like to address in this piece is that lately it appears to me that we have moved from a post-9/11 world to a post-Janet Jackson Superbowl appearance world.
In the past few weeks, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been pressing for new legislature that would allow fines for indecency on radio to be raised from the present $27,500 to $500,000. All of this, I believe, results from what is now colorfully referred to as “Nipplegate.”
But what bothers me about this new crusade against indecency is how indecency is being defined: “Obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. To be obscene, material must meet a three-pronged test: (1) an average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (2) the material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and (3) the material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value,” (FCC).
My problem with all of this is two-fold.
First, I do not like how there seems to be a set standard on what we all view as indecent. If we as a country can agree that we are all different, then why do we have one standard of what is indecent? Clearly, what I view as indecent is not going to be the same as many other people.
But who is to blame? Is it the government? Or is it perhaps the religious right in America? I believe that all of these groups others play a part in it, but I point the finger at another group of Americans.
Children.
That’s right, I said it.
I blame children.
Now, I like children, but whenever these issues of indecency are raised, a big part of the reasoning is to protect children. I am personally sick and tired of having to sacrifice my adult pleasures for the sake of the children. When I was growing up I was always told that some things were for adults and not for children; when did we lose sight of that?
No one forces children to watch or listen to programming aimed for adult audiences, so why eliminate said programs? This now falls into the category of parental responsibility. Parents need to do a better job of monitoring what their kids are exposed to.
Also, if people find something offensive, they can always change the station! How is that for a novel idea? There are always plenty of alternatives out there, especially in radio. With A.M. and F.M. stations, there is a practical cornucopia of programming from Howard Stern to Billy Graham.
My second problem is that right now they are targeting people like Howard Stern and other shock jocks who make their money off of being controversial with what they say.
But what happens if we allow this to continue, does it stop with the shock jocks? No, of course not.
Ponder this hypothetical scenario: What if John Kerry gets elected president and he starts going after prominent conservative radio personalities like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Dr. Laura Schlesinger under the guise of them being obscene and indecent?
As much as I may disagree with what these people stand for, silencing them is equally unacceptable. We need as much free and open discourse in this country as possible. Trying to say that the ways some people choose to express themselves, whether it be in the political arena or in any other area of life, and then defining those thoughts as indecent is opening a Pandora’s box that will only lead to censorship and the continued tattering of the first amendment.
I am not saying that you have to like Stern, Limbaugh or anything else on the airwaves, but we all need to have the option to change the station if we feel the need. Government, or any other group for that matter, should not be making this decision for anyone.