why no foul language in news reports ?

gurramok

Hi,
Don't understand why cursing is not allowed when members of the public give their reactions to a news story on tv and yet on other tv programmes either side of the news bulletin, cursing can be heard from wonderful actors and actresses !
I think is a bit hypocrytical, is there some language code used to advise people that get interviewed on the street not to curse(even mildly) ?
As we all know, cursing does happen in everyday lingo, its a bit ridiculous trying to hide it in a news report !

Only Human

gurramok wrote:

Hi,
Don't understand why cursing is not allowed when members of the public give their reactions to a news story on tv and yet on other tv programmes either side of the news bulletin, cursing can be heard from wonderful actors and actresses !
I think is a bit hypocrytical, is there some language code used to advise people that get interviewed on the street not to curse(even mildly) ?
As we all know, cursing does happen in everyday lingo, its a bit ridiculous trying to hide it in a news report !

Times will change but standards must remain. The news is meant to be news not entertainment. Using foul language is a form of expressing an opinion which news reporters are not meant to do. As news becomes more and more a form of entertainment I think we will see the standards of news broadcasting being dropped.

billy the squid

Telivision shows which have actors cursing are not considered an essential broadcast. people who are offended by cursing do not have to watch programmes where actors curse. whereas news broadcasts are meant to be presented so that everyone who watches it is not offended by the way it is presented.

besides swearing would add nothing to a news bulletin.

gurramok

I understand that the presenters are suppose to have standards. Its the other way around with members of the public who are interviewed on camera on a street for instance.
Some curse, some don't.
If you want to curse when being interviewed, will they bar your interview from being shown or would it be full of beeps ?

Creamy Goodness

news is formal.

talking to the president is formal

would you say f*** or s*** to the president?

flogen

As billy the squid said, a curse would add nothing to the news, it would just lower the tone. I can think of 100 different ways to articulate how angry I am without cursing, if anything an educated and well articulated comment free of LCD language puts forward a better case than just calling someone a gobshíte or saying something is a fooking disgrace.

Besides, most of these "what do the public think" pieces are trashy fillers used by lazy journalists, sometimes its needed but more often than not it's something to make up the minutes. (again, it adds nothing to the news)

flogen

Only Human

Cremo wrote:

news is formal.

talking to the president is formal

would you say f*** or s*** to the president?

Well it depends which president. Wouldn't you just love to tell Bush to go f*ck himself.

Creamy Goodness

Only Human wrote:

Well it depends which president. Wouldn't you just love to tell Bush to go f*ck himself.

i still wouldn't curse at him, he'd take it so personally he'd nuke ireland or something to that effect.

gurramok

flogen wrote:

As billy the squid said, a curse would add nothing to the news, it would just lower the tone. I can think of 100 different ways to articulate how angry I am without cursing, if anything an educated and well articulated comment free of LCD language puts forward a better case than just calling someone a gobshíte or saying something is a fooking disgrace.

Besides, most of these "what do the public think" pieces are trashy fillers used by lazy journalists, sometimes its needed but more often than not it's something to make up the minutes. (again, it adds nothing to the news)

flogen

Are there any controls in place to prevent foul language being broadcast in interviews ?
If I gave my reaction to lets say a football match to a reporter by saying 'it was a sh1tty game', would my comment be broadcast as part of their news report or discarded due to rules and regulations banning foul language?

seamus

gurramok wrote:

If I gave my reaction to lets say a football match to a reporter by saying 'it was a sh1tty game', would my comment be broadcast as part of their news report or discarded due to rules and regulations banning foul language?

If they were stuck for material or you otherwise made a good piece, they'd probably just dub out the swear, I've seen it before.

It's not so much "banned" as just something you don't do. The same reaction was given to the tsunami pictures, because the news isn't a programme that "You can just not watch if you don't like it", and there are plenty of people who don't watch much except for the news, who'd be offended by such things.

I really echo everyone else on this - what would it add?

bonkey

Only Human wrote:

Well it depends which president. Wouldn't you just love to tell Bush to go f*ck himself.

Love to? I sure would.

Given the opportunity to say some words to the man, though, I'd more than likely try something a more eloquent.

jc

dearg_doom

bonkey wrote:

Love to? I sure would.

Given the opportunity to say some words to the man, though, I'd more than likely try something a more eloquent.

jc

lol, the irony here is that the poor guy probably wouldn't understand your eloquent sentiments;)

Victor

They rarely do pr0n on the news either

zenith

Swearing is perfectly permissible in a news story if it adds to, or is, the news story. For example, Albert Renyolds and his 'crap'.

It wasn't always thus: Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh, I think, a former President of Ireland, resigned over being called, or thinking he was called, a 'thundering bollo cks and fu cking disgrace' by the defence minister of the day, though the newspaper reports had it as a 'thundering disgrace', and which caused some scratching of heads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cearbhall_%D3_D%E1laigh

Basically, the standard is offends public morality: and those standards have been changing. It's commonplace to hear swearing on 2FM now, whereas before it would have been very rare. I can't imagine anybody being held to account for inadvertent swearing, and deliberate swearing either has a purpose - as in adds to the news story - or is designed to shock, which isn't part of what news does.