Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1989478
 


 



When Does F*** Not Mean F***: FCC v. Fox Television Stations and a Call for Protecting Emotive Speech


W. Wat Hopkins


Virginia Tech

2011

Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol. 64, p. 1, 2011

Abstract:     
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: 46

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: January 23, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Hopkins, W. Wat, When Does F*** Not Mean F***: FCC v. Fox Television Stations and a Call for Protecting Emotive Speech (2011). Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol. 64, p. 1, 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1989478

Contact Information

W. Wat Hopkins (Contact Author)
Virginia Tech ( email )
Blacksburg, VA 24061
United States
540-231-9833 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 553
Downloads: 70
Download Rank: 203,303

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.281 seconds