A word or two about slipping TV standards

After huge fines and public outrage, the now infamous Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” at the 2004 Super Bowl was supposed to have had a chilling effect on broadcast television’s drive to rattle the cages of social convention. But instead, the major networks have only gotten hotter, particularly when it comes to language.

Moments like last month’s bleeping of Sally Field’s expletive at the Emmys can be a distraction to what has actually been going on in prime-time scripted programs for years -- the steady rise in coarse language. Unlike live award shows, live sporting events or cable, broadcast television operates in a much stricter world where government decency rules are at their tightest, the word choices most carefully considered and the level of scrutiny -- and potential for fines -- are at their greatest.

And yet, crude words and references in prime-time programming are at an all-time high. And as the new fall season pours out into viewers’ homes over the coming weeks, the one certainty is that the dialogue will only get more colorful.

To critics, the language is another depressing sign of a lowest-common-denominator culture sinking ever deeper into vulgarity. To many TV writers and others, however, it’s a largely harmless phenomenon, not to mention a more realistic reflection of everyday conversation -- and any gnashing of teeth over it stems from the nation’s prudish Puritanical heritage.

Language is a singular spoke in a larger societal wheel of complaints about television and pop culture in general that includes racy sexual content and unrelenting violence as well -- something most network executives and writers contacted for this story did not want to talk about on the record. Nonprofit groups such as the Parents Television Council are pressuring lawmakers to find a way to broaden their powers over the medium in hopes of steamrolling, even rolling back, what they consider the disturbing trends.

“It’s a clear path from not too long ago where we had standards for language to where there are practically no standards anymore,” said Tim Winter, president of the L.A.-based watchdog group whose 1.1 million members generate the overwhelming majority of complaints the government receives about TV’s offensiveness. “We’re talking about broadcast television in prime time, not a New York taxi stop, not a football locker room, not the way a vice president may talk in private.”

Fighting for its share

The trend has occurred during a time in which the major networks are battling for audience in a freewheeling and crowded entertainment universe where rougher words can mean the difference between being seen as hip and relevant and being square and extinct. In fact, if you compare what passes for uncouth on nighttime TV with popular music, adult-oriented movies and snarky websites, it’s practically an oasis of civility.

“If a joke is just as funny saying ‘penis’ than ‘pecker,’ that’s fine,” said Greg Garcia, who opted for the latter word in a January episode of his hit NBC comedy, “My Name Is Earl,” now in its third season. “But sometimes it’s funnier to say ‘pecker’ and that’s what you have to do because it’s our job to make people laugh.”

Words such as “hell,” “damn” and “bitch” that only a generation ago were practically verboten are common today across the prime-time schedules of all the major networks. From 1995 to 2005, the percentage of shows that threw around sexually-derived vulgarities shot up from 41% to 64%, while shows that incorporated scatological vulgarities rose from 58% to 83%, according to the PTC, which tracks offensive language, sexual content and violence on television.

In fact, only one of the so-called seven dirty words made famous by comedian George Carlin has not been aired on prime-time TV when including ABC’s showing of the graphic World War II drama “Saving Private Ryan.” Three of the words have been spoken in scripted prime-time shows.

While the letters of the banned dirty words do not regularly find their way into prime-time material, clearly their spirit does. For example, this season the CW’s new teen drama “Gossip Girl” referred to a group gathering as a “fustercluck.” Last season, Emmy-award winning “30 Rock” worked around a particularly obscene slang word for a woman by substituting a rhyming word for it. The name of the episode was “The C Word.”

Because it uses public airwaves, broadcast TV must contend with the Federal Communications Commission, which charges broadcasters with avoiding “indecent” language -- in particular, from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. As with pornography, the government has had trouble establishing a clear-cut definition for offensive language, but basically it must violate “contemporary community standards.”

After Jackson’s breast was exposed during a Super Bowl halftime show, complaints to the FCC skyrocketed, and the outrage paved the way for last year’s Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, which increases fines for indecency from $32,500 to $325,000 for each incident. Thus far, the FCC hasn’t gone after any networks under the new law -- but that could change.

“How these cases move through the system is difficult to predict -- sometimes it can take months, even years,” said Jeremy Lipschultz, director of the School of Communication at the University of Nebraska at Omaha and author of a book on the FCC’s indecency regulations, “Broadcast and Internet Indecency.” “It wouldn’t be that surprising if they are working on something now.”

Broadcast scripted television’s growing acceptance, even reliance, on coarse language and situations has been fueled by heated competition with its cable cousins. Original cable programming on pay channels such as Showtime and HBO, where an episode of “The Sopranos” can zip through the seven dirty words in the opening minutes, have little to fear from a government whose attitude toward them is essentially “let the buyer beware.”

Likewise ad-supported cable channels such as FX, USA Network and MTV have far more creative license and routinely pepper their shows with expletives and foul words at a far greater rate than the major networks. Ad-supported cable channels -- seen in 85% of American homes -- are beholden to “obscenity” laws, a much more difficult legal standard to prosecute than the “decency” standards that govern broadcast television.

“Broadcast television has evolved at all levels to reflect the way people behave, whether it’s sex, violence or the way people talk,” said Barry Sapolsky, a communications professor at Florida State University who has published studies on offensive language on broadcast and cable television. “I don’t see this changing unless we have some kind of cultural pogrom.”

The believability factor

It’s exactly that perceived realism that Todd A. Kessler, a former writer for “The Sopranos,” was after in his well-received show “Damages,” which this summer began airing after 10 p.m. on FX. In it, Glenn Close’s aggressive attorney character is locked in major litigation with an Enron-type CEO and is referred to by an opposing attorney in very vulgar language.

“We’re not trying to push boundaries,” said Kessler, one of the show’s co-creators. “But she functions in a society where she does battle not with guns, but with words. So words become very potent and powerful.”

FX’s President John Landgraf defended the appropriateness of the language on “Damages” and those of his other gritty nighttime dramas such as “The Shield” as well.

“There’s very little you won’t see on our air as long as it’s in context and not gratuitous,” said Landgraf, who blames the PTC for almost all complaints against FX’s word choices. “Because, frankly, it’d be ludicrous to write shows about high-stakes litigators, cops, firemen, plastic surgeons or tabloid journalists without using profanity.”

Linguistic sleight of hand

Other ad-supported cable outlets, such as the Sci Fi Channel, that don’t want to risk alienating their younger audiences have found ways around using harsh language that might otherwise upset the sensibilities of their viewers or advertisers. David Eick, executive producer of the Sci Fi Channel’s “Battlestar Galactica,” used the example of the word “frak.” “It’s amazing to me that ‘frak’ hasn’t gotten a single note” from network executives, Eick said, “because it’s the dirtiest world in television.”

“Without it, we’d be using words like . . . ‘fudge’ or some other sugar-coated words and it feels like you have training wheels on your language,” added Eick, who also is executive producer on NBC’s “Bionic Woman.” “So, instead of losing yourself in the story, you’re being yanked out of the experience and it’s much harder to suspend disbelief.”

To the vast majority of television viewers, there is no real distinction between broadcast and ad-supported cable channels -- it’s all television. That’s one of the main reasons why the PTC and FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin -- who declined to be interviewed for this story -- have been urging Congress to support an a la carte approach for buying cable. This would allow consumers to cherry-pick their cable content, but these legislative efforts have failed to galvanize widespread support.

“When you’re inviting Disney into your home, you shouldn’t be forced to take the thousands of expletives on MTV or Comedy Central,” said Winter. “If you want to have coarse language, fine, but don’t force me to buy that kind of language.”

But cable executives such as Landgraf argue that between V-chips, parental controls on cable and satellite boxes, and television’s ratings system, enough protections are in place to keep children away from inappropriate material. Further, Landgraf said he believes PTC efforts to impose a la carte programming or even to bring the entire cable industry under FCC purview are doomed to fail. “They’d be found unconstitutional,” he said. “The courts have said over and over again that the government must find the least restrictive means to impose decency standards.”

As broadcast television creeps toward cable in its use of coarse language, it remains unclear what effect, if any, it has on the intended beneficiary of the decency battles, namely, children. Even Winter admits there is no firm evidence linking bad language to dangerous behavior, but he said some studies have suggested it may lead to more bullying and a general disrespect for authority.

When it comes to weighing language for his next episode of “My Name Is Earl” and its effect on youngsters, Garcia is ultimately guided by his own children -- some not old enough to tune into “Earl.” “When we’re in the writing room and something comes up and it makes us all laugh, but it’s on the edge,” he said, “I think, ‘All right, when my kids are 14 will I want them to watch it?’ ”

--

martin.miller@latimes.com