Fearing FCC action on indecency, stations pull 'Private Ryan'
What began as an attempt to honor Veterans Day with a powerful war movie turned into a battle between ABC and balky affiliates when some stations opted not to broadcast "Saving Private Ryan" last night, saying they feared an aggressive Federal Communications Commission crackdown on indecency.
Among the stations that chose not to run Stephen Spielberg's acclaimed film -- which includes graphic violence and profanity -- were four ABC affiliates owned by
WCVB's general manager, Paul La Camera, said the decision not to air the film was "a cry for clarity from the FCC. . . . They have told us that the language [in the movie] is unlawful in this day and age . . . The rules have changed and there are greater sensitivities."
La Camera said he asked the FCC for assurances there would be no action taken against stations showing "Saving Private Ryan" and asked ABC to allow Channel 5 to start the film at 10 p.m. instead of 8 p.m in order to abide by commission rules that create a "safe harbor" for such programming. Both requests were rejected. "You wish on the one hand that the commission had given us some guidelines and that ABC had been a bit more flexible," he said.
ABC spokeswoman Susan Sewell acknowledged that the network refused to allow affiliates to push the start time past 8 p.m., saying ABC wanted the movie "to run in pattern across the country." She said ABC was offering to pay any fines levied by the FCC and noted that the film had been broadcast in 2001 and 2002 and had also survived an indecency complaint before the FCC.
"Needless to say, the vast majority of our stations are running it," Sewell said, adding that the network was under a "contractual obligation" to run the film unedited. "Clearly, we feel it's fine to run or else we wouldn't be offering it."
Aside from the Belo, E.W. Scripps, and Hearst-Argyle stations that are opting out, the Associated Press reported that some outlets owned by Cox Television,
Judy Shoemaker, a spokesman for WLNE-TV (Channel 6) in Providence, said yesterday that the station was broadcasting "Saving Private Ryan" because "we believe this is a very important, powerful film and it's a tribute to our veterans. There is violence. There is bad language. But it's not gratuitous. . . . It's different than Janet Jackson exposing herself at the Super Bowl."
That infamous "wardrobe malfunction" has been a catalyst for tougher FCC enforcement of indecency rules. It recently levied a $550,000 fine against CBS-owned stations for the Jackson fiasco and fined Fox television stations more than $1 million for airing a racy episode of the reality show "Married by America." In a decision that could have implications for "Saving Private Ryan," the FCC also overruled an earlier decision and decided that rock star Bono's use of an obscenity during a 2003 Golden Globes Awards broadcast was indecent and profane.
Still, there is precedent suggesting that last night's airing of "Saving Private Ryan" may not run afoul of the FCC. The commission has ruled that a broadcast of the movie "Schindler's List" -- which includes nudity -- did not violate the indecency statute and dismissed a similar complaint against an earlier broadcast of "Saving Private Ryan" filed by the American Family Association. The FCC was closed yesterday for Veterans Day and no one was available for comment.
The Parents Television Council, an advocacy group for family-friendly programming, released a statement yesterday from its president, L. Brent Bozell, saying "We agreed with the FCC on its ruling that the airing of 'Schindler's List' on television was not indecent and we feel that 'Saving Private Ryan' is in the same category. We will not be filing an indecency complaint with the FCC over the airing of this film, particularly because it has aired on television in the past."
Council spokeswoman Lara Mahaney wonders why stations were reluctant to air "Saving Private Ryan." "It's ironic that [stations] choose to take a stance on this particular program," she said. "I think there are a lot of things that put them at jeopardy for indecency that they don't preempt."
A statement by E.W. Scripps Co. explaining the decision to preempt made it clear that a newly aggressive FCC was a major factor. "While it has been broadcast twice before, recent federal regulatory decisions on profanity appear to make it clear that the Federal Communications Commission prohibits the broadcast of the type of profanity used in the movie," said a senior vice president for the TV Station Group, William R. Peterson.
La Camera said WCVB was worried about bigger issues than just an FCC fine. "The fines are not an issue," he said. "The fact is this could precipitate a challenge to our license. . . . You never know what a reconstructed FCC is going to look like in a second Bush administration."
