From my original thoughts on obscenity, I found some similarities in the class discussion and some conflicts. However, after reading some responses, I am questioning some of the points. For example, I stated, “something must be banned if it considered so offensive to the average person…” What are the standards for an “average” person? I still believe that the FCC guideless are appropriate in regards to profanity and nudity, sex, etc. air on open public radio and television. The key here is open to the public. In addition, I think that is what is going to distinguish obscenity to me in the end. As confused as I am now about the true definition of obscenity as many of my peers are, I searched further for an explanation. What I have found is that there is really no set-in-stone legal definition of what is obscene. What I did find is called the 3-prong test, which is what the Supreme Court established, which in turn has been what was given to the FCC for their regulations. • An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
* The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and * The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. http://www.fcc.gov/guides/obscenity-indecency-and-profanity
Based on this, in response to your examples, I think a key word in this test is public. Uncensored material, whether sexual in nature or containing profanity should be banned if it is publicly displayed – public speech, radio, television, etc. So, the following should be banned: #’s: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9. Of this group, any public performance containing any sexual content or profanity should be banned. However, this would be contradictory to our current standards, which include some profanity on television and the radio. I would say it...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document