Thursday, November 11, 2004
Private Ryan Gets Busted
And so it begins. From the New York Times website this morning:
The FCC regulations on profane language say that the context in which the language appears is of critical importance--which makes me think these stations are overreacting a bit. The f-bombs in Saving Private Ryan, which are dropped incidentally, are far different from the f-bombs in an episode of The Sopranos, where the characters use them the way some people use the word "like." This plot-driven use of language is similar to the nudity of concentration camp prisoners in Schindler's List, which was broadcast in 1997 (and blasted by then-Congressman, now newly-elected Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn). A glimpse of a starving, naked prisoner is a far different matter than a lingering shot of some starlet wiggling out of a bikini--or Janet Jackson being partially disrobed at the Super Bowl, for that matter.
Nevertheless, affiliates are worried about the movie's content, and perhaps rightly. One station group president says, "We're just coming off an election where moral issues were cited as a reason by people voting one way or another and, in my opinion, the commissioners are fearful of the new Congress."
And so it begins. One of the dark thoughts I've had over the past week concerns precisely to what extent the newly empowered wingnuts can actually succeed with their plans for cultural cleansing. I think to myself that surely, there are too many cable stations, magazines, and Internet sites for them to police, and they'll have their hands full just making a marginal impact on our rights to see, read, hear, and ultimately think whatever we want. But this incident shows us that the wingnuts won't have to do all the work themselves--people who are afraid of them will pitch in to help, thus multiplying their power.
The number of stations preempting the movie represents no more than a handful of ABC affiliates nationwide, but the film some will show instead of Saving Private Ryan provides a commentary on the cultural state of the union: Return to Mayberry.
And so it begins. From the New York Times website this morning:
Several ABC affiliates have announced that they won't take part in the network's Veterans Day airing of "Saving Private Ryan," saying the acclaimed film's violence and language could draw sanctions from the Federal Communications Commission.Station officials say that since they can't get a waiver from the FCC promising that they won't be fined or otherwise cited for broadcasting the film, which includes the word "fuck," they can't risk it. The film has been broadcast twice before, and the FCC acknowledged getting a complaint about the language in 2001. So did at least one affiliate that will be dumping the film this time.
WSOC-TV of Charlotte said it had received complaints about language in the movie when it was aired in 2001 and 2002.Stop and take that in for a second. The movie is inappropriate "with Americans at war across the world." Seems to me that makes Saving Private Ryan more appropriate, not less, if only by helping Americans on their couches to come to a deeper appreciation of the experiences of Americans on the front lines, but that's a subject for another post.
"Now, after much concern and discussion about family viewing over past months, and with Americans at war across the world, it is the vivid depiction of violence combined with graphic language proposed to begin airing at 8 p.m. that has forced our decision," said Lee Armstrong, the station's vice president and general manager.
The FCC regulations on profane language say that the context in which the language appears is of critical importance--which makes me think these stations are overreacting a bit. The f-bombs in Saving Private Ryan, which are dropped incidentally, are far different from the f-bombs in an episode of The Sopranos, where the characters use them the way some people use the word "like." This plot-driven use of language is similar to the nudity of concentration camp prisoners in Schindler's List, which was broadcast in 1997 (and blasted by then-Congressman, now newly-elected Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn). A glimpse of a starving, naked prisoner is a far different matter than a lingering shot of some starlet wiggling out of a bikini--or Janet Jackson being partially disrobed at the Super Bowl, for that matter.
Nevertheless, affiliates are worried about the movie's content, and perhaps rightly. One station group president says, "We're just coming off an election where moral issues were cited as a reason by people voting one way or another and, in my opinion, the commissioners are fearful of the new Congress."
And so it begins. One of the dark thoughts I've had over the past week concerns precisely to what extent the newly empowered wingnuts can actually succeed with their plans for cultural cleansing. I think to myself that surely, there are too many cable stations, magazines, and Internet sites for them to police, and they'll have their hands full just making a marginal impact on our rights to see, read, hear, and ultimately think whatever we want. But this incident shows us that the wingnuts won't have to do all the work themselves--people who are afraid of them will pitch in to help, thus multiplying their power.
The number of stations preempting the movie represents no more than a handful of ABC affiliates nationwide, but the film some will show instead of Saving Private Ryan provides a commentary on the cultural state of the union: Return to Mayberry.
