Time evolves standards in media and entertainment. Certain norms become extinct, yet our acceptance of what was once considered profanity changes with time. There used to be a time when testing the boundaries was shocking. When Howard Stern was the “King of All Media,” pushing those boundaries was part of what made him controversial. Today, more is said and done publicly than ever before. It has become normalized within our daily media culture. Sports is no different.
In the last week, there have been hosts smoking weed on camera, drinking beer bongs and swearing on live television in front of national audiences. Yet, is there any enforcement of the standards governing live television? Are there fines and suspensions being levied? Or do we need to wait for someone to file a complaint with the FCC first? Welcome to the Wild West of sports media.
There was a lot made of Pat McAfee being allowed to swear on ESPN when the network signed the former punter to a licensing agreement. That was three years ago. Yet, there hasn’t been a fine or suspension. Last week, McAfee was enjoying some “sage” during a break on ESPN. It’s not the first time he has been on camera enjoying the herb. But again, nothing.
Sure, the FCC doesn’t oversee cable networks like ESPN. It’s not an over-the-air broadcast station.
When Nick Wright shotgunned a beer out of a celebratory Buffalo Bills beer horn on First Things First, even his co-hosts appeared a little startled by the notion.
“There’s new rules about what you’re allowed to smoke or drink on TV,” Wright said.
“Can you do that legally?” asked Wright’s co-host, Chris Broussard.
Good question. Can you legally drink alcohol on live television? I don’t know. Can you?
This weekend, Tom Brady, who makes $37.5 million per season at FOX Sports, blurted out, “Oh s**t” to a national television audience. Yes, he immediately apologized for the remark. But was it profane, or was it simply Tom Brady getting comfortable in the broadcast booth?
A Different Era
That question gets to the heart of the issue. What qualifies as unacceptable content has changed dramatically. Yet the regulatory framework governing traditional broadcast media has not evolved at the same pace.
The FCC restricts the broadcast of profane material during hours when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. Those rules apply to broadcast television and radio, but not in the same way to subscription-based services such as cable, satellite television or satellite radio.
That’s what the FCC says. But you don’t need a subscription to watch The Pat McAfee Show on YouTube. You don’t need a subscription to download a podcast from virtually any platform. You don’t need to pay for access to watch countless creators push the boundaries of language and content every day.
If the biggest distinction in applying these standards is whether a consumer receives the content through a traditional broadcast signal or an internet connection, the regulatory framework deserves another look.
More content is consumed online than ever before. Every social and streaming platform offers endless options for audiences to consume unfiltered dialogue. Yet broadcast radio and television talent remain guarded, with delays at the ready and restrictions that their competitors do not face.
It’s time for change.
Broadcast Freedom
If satellite radio and digital media have taught us anything, it’s that what was once considered profane can now be considered authentic. Audiences have the ability to determine when something goes too far. On-air personalities are capable of understanding what is and isn’t acceptable when engaging with an audience.
That doesn’t mean anything should go. There should always be standards, accountability and an understanding that certain content has no place in certain programming environments. But those standards should reflect the reality of the modern media landscape.
If networks and broadcasters continue pushing the boundaries across television, cable and digital media without meaningful consequences, it’s time to stop pretending broadcast media should play by a different set of rules.
The media landscape, audience, and definition of what is considered offensive or profane has changed. Yet broadcast radio and television remain bound by standards created for a media environment that no longer exists. If talent across cable, satellite radio, podcasts, YouTube and streaming platforms can speak freely without consequence, broadcast talent shouldn’t have to operate with one hand tied behind its back.
The industry has already evolved. The rules simply haven’t caught up. If broadcast media is going to compete for the same audience, it should at least be allowed to play by rules that reflect the media world we actually live in.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
While I understand the sentiment, I strongly disagree. The standards of broadcast radio (and TV), which has admittedly changed over the years, allows parents to put the radio on in the car even when there are young children with them without having to be concerned that they will hear words and ideas they have deemed inappropriate for those they are trying to raise. (There are still adults that bristle at such language too, and I wonder if dropping the standards would bring in more listeners than would be lost.) A similar argument can be made for TV.
Because the New York Sportsradio Alumni Network is built on creators, I don’t tell those whose content are posted on our sites what they should or shouldn’t say (although I may make suggestions), with one exception: no cursing. I want to create an environment that allows sports fans to hear the sports content they are looking for without hesitating to play it out loud. (Yes, I have muted curse words in some clips from podcast hosts, and even changed the wording of the corresponding caption if I included captions in the clip.)
The airwaves are still “public,” even if the standards that have been set are not being enforced (including pirate radio stations). They should remain public enough that even families and communities sensitive to certain content can comfortably access it with other members of their family and community.
Appreciate your feedback Dov. My point was the rules should be no longer be church and state between broadcast and non-traditional broadcast. We’re to a point now where the audience has more options than ever, and talent cater to their audience more than ever because they understand the relationship and it’s value.
To play by different rules when everything is considered on the same playing field in the content race is holding the broadcast side back from being that added level of authentic if they so choose. It can’t be no longer one talent can do this versus another when the majority of their content is consumed in the same places but rules for engagement or performance are different by arcane rules for the 1960’s.
To this 53 year radio broadcaster, I can accept an honest moment by someone on the air getting overly emotional over something.
On the other hand, I don’t understand why “professional decorum” can’t be the attitude until “safe harbor” at 10 pm.
Anything else is an excuse.
You know, I am TIRED of free TV viewers being spit on just because of frequent little mistakes such as these! Yes, I know pay TV (cable/sat/stream/etc) may be out of reach for some people pricewise, and then like myself, there are those that don’t want pay TV because of negatives like too much reality/adult shows, bad customer service, etc. But come on, we (in a way) still “pay” for free TV through supporting advertisers, and we should not be punished for watching free “Andy Griffith” and free “Looney Tunes” just because of an, ahem, “peep show” going on a major network at the same time?
And if you want a more redeeming reason to ditch pay TV for antenna, well, as Bill Nye would say, “consider the following.”
I did a research on the cost of living then vs. now (don’t worry, this is not a political rant) and here is what I discovered (the last figure on each is the most disturbing):
In 1985:
– The cost of milk was $2.26 a gallon
– The cost of gas was $1.20 a gallon
– The cost of basic cable was $10 a month
Fast forward to 2025:
– The cost of milk became $4.02 a gallon
– The cost of gas became $3.22 a gallon
– The cost of basic cable (if you still wanted, at minimum, all the local channels and the basic networks that existed 40 years ago) became (are you sitting down?) $149 A MONTH. (YES, 1-4-9, and I did NOT even misplace the decimal point!)
Guys and gals, over the course of 40 years, the cost of milk rose 180%.
The cost of gas rose 270%.
The cost of basic cable rose 1,500% (FIFTEEN HUNDRED PERCENT)!!!!!!!!!!