In the past I've written that never have I heard someone leaving a theater say to the person he's with, "You know, honey, I liked that movie, but I just wish it had had a lot more cussin'."
The point was that, despite its pervasiveness in entertainment, bad language isn't something demanded by most consumers. It is, it seems to me, just tossed in gratuitously many times.
a recent study suggests I may be wrong.
When it comes to television, profanity might be exactly what a good portion of the viewing audience craves.
That's if you believe a recent poll of more than 1,000 americans taken by The Pere Partnership, a New York advertising agency.
When asked what impact bad language in a television program had on them, 43 percent of participants said it would make the show more appealing. Talk about cheap thrills.
Only eight percent of those answering said bad language would cause them to not watch a particular program.
When the topic was changed to sexual insinuations, 45 percent maintained including such material makes shows more appealing. Eleven percent said they wouldn't watch programming like that.
But wait. another recent public opinion survey found very different conclusions.
Last March, Time Magazine published the results of its own poll. In that one, 58 percent of respondents said there is too much cursing and sexual language on TV.
Not only that, 42 percent claims to be personally offended by it and 41 percent wants the government to ban it.
Obviously, polls can be designed to elicit the desired findings. But two opinion surveys with such diametrically different results have to make you wonder if we americans are schizophrenic when it comes to TV's bad language.
Possibly many of us are. The world has changed. No one can question that we're exposed to greater amounts of harsher public profanity than ever before.
Walking in a mall, I hear high school girls use language, loudly and without the slightest hint of embarrassment, that would have made guys I was in the army with blush.
Media executives will aver that profanity on TV and in the movies doesn't contribute to this phenomenon. No, they assert including that content in their programming makes it more realistic and is merely a reflection of modern life.
This argument ignores the profound influence that television and films have on popular culture. That influence has been abundantly documented many times. It's a cause, although certainly not the only one, of the general coarsening of our society.
according to a Parents Television Council study, in 2002 foul language was used more than half a dozen times per hour during prime time. and this didn't measure cable shows, only the network programming.
We've come a very long way from the days of Leave It to Beaver and other programs that managed to entertain without profanity. Whether or not that journey has been an encouraging one is in the eye of the beholder.
One aspect of Time's poll is especially puzzling. although a majority believes there's too much cursing and sexual language on TV and a large percentage wants the government to step in, they must not find the situation that grave.
The people surveyed were asked if they had ever complained to a broadcaster or the government. Had they ever joined in a boycott or demonstration about indecent or explicit TV content?
Only five percent, one out of twenty, had done so. This suggests that the rest must not be all that disturbed by what they're hearing.
Or, perhaps, they fear accusations of censorship. In this I'm OK, you're OK age, we increasingly avoid doing anything that could be construed as trying to impose our views on others. Or even voicing our concerns for fear of offending.
So expecting the government to do something about things we don't want to do something about must be the answer.
On this, as with many other matters, we're of at least two minds. The only certainty is Ward and June aren't ever coming back.
This appears in the September 22, 2005 Oak Lawn (IL) Reporter. Mike Bates is the author of Right angles and Other Obstinate Truths.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement