All the words that the Times finds fit to print

Sandy Levinson

An article in the New York Times by Stephen Labaton reports that the Second Circuit, in a split decision, put paid, as the English might say, to the FCC draconian (and stupid to boot) policy on
"indecent language" by which networks were threatened with substantial fines for broadcasting, say, Bono's saying "fucking brilliant" during a Golden Globes award ceremony. (As it happened, the FCC backed off on that particular one, but Michael Powell, the FCC head, announced that the Commission was prepared to crack down on subsequent similar events. He announced that he was a militant opponent of what he called the "f-word.") A number of networks challenged the FCC's policy, and their challenge was upheld. One of the majority's arguments was that the language being censored was similar to that used by such luminaries as Dick Cheney, speaking distinctly non sotto voce to Patrick Leahy, telling him to "go fuck yourself." I don't know if they also cited Dick Cheney's well-known reference to Adam Clymer, then the New York Times reporter covering the 2000 campaign, as a "major league asshole." Perhaps that's not such a serious breach in the delicate ears of Michael Powell.

So how does the Paper of Record report this story? Not very well, I'm afraid:

Adopting an argument made by lawyers for NBC, the judges then cited examples in which Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney had used the same language that would be penalized under the policy. Mr. Bush was caught on videotape last July using a common vulgarity that the commission finds objectionable in a conversation with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. [That is, he remarked, not realizing that microphones were still live, that Hezbollah ought "to stop doing this shit."] Three years ago, Mr. Cheney was widely reported to have muttered an angry obscene version of “get lost” to Senator Patrick Leahy. on the floor of the United States Senate.

One might note that this doesn't begin to inform a reader as to what actually was said. This is like the Times's reporting on Cohen v. California many years ago and never pointing out that he had been arrested for wearing a jacket saying "Fuck the Draft." That is, there are times when the language is the story, and the way the Times is covering this particular story simply makes them look foolish. Indeed, it's worse than that, because the Times, which I strongly suspect will support the decision on its editorial page, gives indirect support to Michael Powell's crusade by behaving as if the world will come to an end if the word "fuck" appears in the august pages of the Times (though it has long since appeared in, among others, the New Yorker, Harpers, Atlantic, and Times Literary Supplement, for starters). It really is as if they continued to refer to "white meat" lest a reference to a chicken breast shock the young.
Posted 10:48 PM by Sandy Levinson [link]