A quick guide to obscenity and indecency
What is obscenity?
The word "obscene" is used by critics to describe anything from unpopular opinions to X-rated videotapes. But, obscenity is a legal term. Under the Supreme Court's 1983 Miller vs. California decision, a three-part test must be applied to determine whether material is obscene.
- Whether “a reasonable person applying contemporary community standards” would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient (lustful) interests;
- Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined as obscene by the applicable state law; and
- Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific values.
Material in a daily newspaper rarely, if ever, would qualify as obscene under this test. A bigger potential issue for journalists is indecency.
What is indecency? Indecency became a large issue with the passage of a new telecommunications law. The bill, passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton in 1996, establishes criminal penalties for transmitting "indecent" material or making available "patently offensive" material to a person under age 18 by means of a computer network.
The law defines indecency as any communication "that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs." The limitation goes far beyond the legal definition of obscenity.
Anyone who "knowingly" transmits such information could face up to two years in jail and be fined as much as $250,000 for an individual and $500,000 for a business.
Things to consider?
Reporters, editors and columnists sometimes will encounter vulgar language and explicit descriptions in copy. While legally safe most of the time, here are some issues to consider:
- Is the language necessary to communicate the message of the story? Or will it divert attention from the story's primary focus?
- Is the author using certain words just for shock value without journalistic justification?
- Is there less offensive language that would communicate the same idea?
In short, weigh the positives against the negatives when making decisions on whether to run questionable material. |
|
