When Does F*** Not Mean F***: FCC v. Fox Television Stations and a Call for Protecting Emotive Speech
W. Wat Hopkins
Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol. 64, p. 1, 2011
The Supreme Court of the United States doesn’t always deal cogently with non-traditional language. The most recent example is FCC v. Fox Television Stations, in which the justices became sidetracked into attempting to define the f-word and then to determine whether, when used as a fleeting expletive rather than repeatedly, the word is indecent for broadcast purposes. The Court would do well to avoid definitions and heed Justice John Marshall Harlan’s advice in Cohen v. California to provide protection for the emotive, as well as the cognitive, element of speech.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 46Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: January 23, 2012
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.406 seconds