Offensive Language in Prime Time Television: Before and After Content Ratings 
 

      Portrayals of physical aggression and sexual behavior and language in primetime network television have been extensively researched.  A related area that has received less attention is that of offensive language, which can be considered a form of verbal aggression (Jay, 1992). The use of cuss words, which are deemed offensive by many people, is increasing in everyday discourse (Cameron, 1970) as well as on network television (Polskin, 1989).

       In 1950, Arthur Godfrey was lambasted by viewers, affiliate stations and CBS officials for saying "damn" and "hell" on his live program (MacDonald, 1994). Casual observation suggests that the use of crude language on network television has been increasing since the late 1980s (Polskin, 1989).  The first known scripted usage of "goddamn" was on LA Law in December 1988 (Polskin, 1989).  Audiences heard "penis envy" and "biker bitch" on Murphy Brown (Bechloss, 1990).  Stronger language is tolerated more now by the networks than when Laraine Newman had to apologize to NBC's broadcast standards department for saying "pissed off" during a performance on Saturday Night Live (Hill & Weingrad, 1986).

      Few prime time network programs have stirred more controversy in recent years than NYPD Blue.  Producer Steven Bochco declared that he was "developing a show that would parallel, in language and adult situations, much of what the public might see in an R-rated movie" (Coe, 1993, p. 18).  For instance, in the opening episode of the series, a male detective is shown yelling at a female assistant district attorney. She retorts with "I'd say res ipsa loquitur, if I thought you knew what it meant."   The detective grabs his crotch and barks out, "Hey, ipsa this, you pissy little bitch!" (Leland, Fleming, Miller & Smith, 1993). 

      The subsequent success of NYPD Blue may have signaled a new level of acceptance of "blue" language on prime time television.  The program was heavily criticized for its use of offensive words and phrases and it has sparked interest and concern about the blatant use of swear words on television in general.  Pressure from some members of the viewing public to curb the use of offensive language as well as depictions of violence and sexual activity has led to implementing age-based and content-based ratings systems for television content. Included in the ratings are warnings for "coarse language" and "suggestive dialogue."

      While the nature of sexual and violent television content has been well-documented (Greenberg, 1994; National Television Violence Study 2, 1997), research examining the amount and use of offensive words that many viewers find objectionable is lacking. Many policymakers, broadcast industry leaders, and members of the viewing public make judgments about the frequency of objectionable words on television but there are few studies on which to base these opinions. Therefore, the present longitudinal study examines the amount and kinds of "coarse" language spoken on prime time during three television seasons; 1990, 1994 - after the debut of NYPD Blue, and 1997 - after the implementation of television content ratings (Fall, 1997). 

Offensive Language - General and Mediated Discourse

      Jay (1992) uses terms such as "cursing" and "dirty words" to describe the many different types of words that are considered objectionable or offensive by "the person on the street." The authors of this paper follow the precedent set by Jay by using broad terms such as "cursing," "cussing," "dirty words," and "coarse language," among others, to refer to offensive or objectionable speech without "focusing on a specific type of use" (Jay, 1992, p. 1).  Although language scholars may find these broad terms somewhat imprecise, their meanings are widely accepted by the general public as terms that describe words that are considered unacceptable in everyday conversation and public use (Jay, 1992).

      There are little data on the frequency of offensive language in general conversation.  Studies are plagued with methodological problems that make counting actual word usage difficult (Jay, 1992). Therefore, frequencies of word usage is often based on self-report where respondents are asked how often and in what context they may use certain dirty words (Bailey & Timm, 1976; Johnson & Fine, 1985; Mabry, 1975; Oliver & Rubin, 1975; Reiber, Wiedemann & D'Amato, 1979; Staley, 1978) or on word count estimates.

      In one study of conversations overhead in natural settings, foul language was used in 12.7 percent of adult leisure conversations, 8.1 percent of college conversations, and 3.5 percent of on-the-job conversations, signifying that risque speech is used more often in casual conversation than in more formal situations (Cameron, 1969). More recently, Jay stated that swearing accounts for three percent of on-the-job talk and 13 percent of leisure conversation (Oh, #'*c!!, 1994).

      Cameron (1969) demonstrated that "damn" is the most popular cuss word and is included in the 15 most frequently spoken English words.  Additionally "fuck," "shit," "Jesus," "hell," and "God" are among the 75 words most often verbalized.  However, Mabry  (1975) contends that "fuck" is rarely used in common discourse.

      Offensive language is influenced by the context in which it is used (Jay, 1980, 1992). For example, foul words are more likely to be heard in pool halls and sporting events than in the workplace.  With regard to television program content, there may be some contexts in which the use of offensive language accurately reflects the culture of the situation - cops on the street are likely to cuss more frequently than are lawyers in a courtroom. 

Effects of Offensive Language

      Research on television violence provides evidence that repeated exposure to aggressive behavior may result in a "psychological blunting" of normal emotional responses (Griffiths & Shuckford, 1989, p. 85).  In other words, as a consequence of continually viewing aggression on television viewers may become increasingly tolerant, less aroused and less interested in the violence presented. Research contends that a consequence of repeated exposure to televised aggression and sexuality is that viewers may become desensitized and thus less responsive to broadcast images and words (Condry, 1989; Tan, 1985). As a result of desensitization, viewers are likely to become accustomed to violence and, thus, are likely to engage in aggressive behavior (Condry, 1989; Griffiths & Shuckford, 1989; Tan, 1985).

      The process of desensitization can be applied to verbal aggression. "The repetition of a word thus blunts the original offense caused by inhibition or taboo. This desensitization effect is not particular to dirty words but occurs when any word is used repeatedly" (Jay, 1992, p.14).  Therefore, it is possible that viewers may also become so accustomed and indifferent to offensive language through its repeated use on television that they no longer "hear" the bad words. Additionally, viewers may become more inclined to increase their use of off-color and aggressive language in everyday conversation.

      The combination of habituation to televised swearing and the increase in its use in general discourse may lead to greater use of profanity in dialogue written for television characters. Since media content is expected to reflect the prevailing social culture as a whole, as well as the diversity within that culture (McQuail, 1992), swear words that were once not tolerated on television are now being scripted with increasing frequency.

      Presumably parents, interest groups, regulators and lawmakers are seeking a reduction in offensive language on television because they believe that children will imitate the language they hear, increasing their use of vulgarities in everyday conversation.  While "much of dirty word usage depends on learning" (Jay, 1992, p.18) there is no scientific evidence to date that supports claims of antisocial or harmful effects from such exposure.  Further, children under the age of 12 do not appear to comprehend sexual language and innuendo and it is doubtful, therefore, that such indecent language would have any negative effects (Donnerstein, Wilson & Linz, 1992, Jay, 1992).

      Despite evidence to the contrary, policymakers, watchdog organizations, and other concerned viewers claim that rampant sex talk and profanities on television are contributing to the moral and social breakdown of American society (e.g., Lieberman, 1996).  These groups also justify their call for regulation of the broadcast of offensive speech as a means of protecting parents' rights to direct the rearing of their children (cf. Doctor, 1992).

      It is widely thought that the fuss about dirty language on the airwaves is caused by a small number of viewers. However, these viewers have a strong voice and they have caught the attention of officials who can bring about change. The protestations of those seeking to bridle the use of coarse language on television have led policymakers and governmental agencies to urge the television industry to limit the use of offensive words to times when children are less likely to be watching and to implement a ratings system.  

Broadcast Regulation  

      Language that is considered unacceptable by the general public is loosely described using broad terms such as "cursing" and "dirty" (Jay, 1992). However, the Federal Communication Commission refers to such words as "indecent" and in 1978 the Supreme Court affirmed the FCC's narrow definition of indecency: Language that describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs (Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, 1978).  An important consideration in the definition is the time of day that material is broadcast  -- when there is a reasonable risk that children might be in the audience.   In 1987 the FCC expanded its enforcement of the indecency ruling beyond the repetitive use of the so-called "seven dirty words."1

      The FCC also attempted in 1987 to narrow the "safe harbor" during which indecent programming could be broadcast.   Since 1978 the Federal Communications Commission had considered 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. a "safe harbor" during which indecent programming could be broadcast because of the generally accepted notion that there were fewer children in the audience during these hours.  In 1987 the FCC reduced the safe harbor to midnight to 6 a.m.  A U.S. Court of Appeals decision in 1988 reversed the FCC's safe harbor policy, ruling that the commission could not enforce a ban against indecent evening broadcasts until it further investigated children's viewing behavior (Action for Children's Television v. FCC, 1988).   Shortly thereafter, Congress attempted to enact a 24-hour ban against indecent speech.   In 1991 the 24-hour ban was ruled unconstitutional (Action for Children's Television v. FCC, 1991).

      Since the early 1990s the television industry has been the target of intense criticism from lawmakers, political and religious groups, concerned parents, and many members of the general viewing public because of programs said to glorify violence and contain many instances of coarse language. Attempts at self-regulation (e.g., parental advisories) failed to reduce the pressure from  policymakers and media watchdog groups. After much debate, Congress passed The Telecommunications Act of 1996.  In a section titled "Parental Choice in Television Programming", the Act calls for "rating of video programming that contains sexual, violent or other indecent material" and requires distributors "to transmit such rating to permit parents to block the display of video programming that they have determined is inappropriate for their children"  (Telecommunications Act of 1996, p. 89).   The television industry initially offered an age-based rating system similar to the one used by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).2 However, from its inception the MPAA-style ratings system came under attack from key lawmakers and interest groups for not providing adequate information and guidance to parents.  One monitoring group reported instances of sexual innuendoes, verbal vulgarities and explicit violence almost as often in PG shows as in shows rated TV-14 (Johnson, 1997a).  The television industry capitulated and agreed to the adoption of a content-based ratings system to be implemented by October 1, 1997.3  The new system added to the age-based ratings a set of content warnings: "V" for violence, "S" for sexual content, "L" for coarse language and "D" for suggestive dialogue (Albiniak, 1997). 

Frequency of Offensive Language on Television

      Studies of offensive language on television have been limited largely to reports done by watchdog groups.  The Media Research Center content analyzed four weeks of "family hour" (8 - 9 p.m., EST)4 programming on six networks5 in September-October, 1995 and again in February, 1997 (Johnson, 1996; 1997b).  Vulgar language increased from 0.62 incidents per hour in 1995 to 0.88 per hour in 1997.  The most commonly occurring curse words in 1995 included "ass" (29), "bitch" (13) and "bastard" (10); in 1997 "ass" was heard most often (29) followed by "bastard" (13) and various euphemistic and bleeped forms of "fuck" (10).   The Center also content analyzed two weeks of prime time programming on the six networks immediately after implementation of the age-based ratings system in January, 1997.  Offensive words were found 0.79 times per hour with "ass" (71), "bastard" (28) and "bitch" (23) voiced most often (Johnson, 1997a).  In its criticism of the new ratings system, the report noted that 52 percent of PG-rated shows contained words such as "ass", "bastard", "son of a bitch" and "suck"; one PG program included two uses of "fucking" (drowned out by the sound of a power drill).   

      One published study examines the use of offensive language in six episodes of NYPD Blue aired in Fall, 1993 and a comparison set of prime time situation comedies and dramas from the same period (Kaye & Fishburne, 1997). NYPD Blue contained 15.8 instances of offensive language per hour, well above the rate for dramatic programs (5.0 per hour) but equal to that found in situation comedies (15.8).  Within NYPD Blue, coarse language was most often in the form of insults (7.2 per hour; e.g., Detective Sipowicz calling a suspect a "loud-mouthed douche bag").  Moreover, two of the "seven dirty words", "tits" and "piss" were heard a total of nine times.  In contrast, situation comedies contained milder words such as "damn" and "hell" uttered in a light-hearted vein.

      Lawmakers and interest groups have pursued a content-based ratings system in part because they believe commercial television is full of offensive language. However, there is little empirical evidence to substantiate these judgments and beliefs.  Only limited research, much of it provided by the interest groups themselves, has focused on the nature and frequency of coarse language on network television.  Therefore, the present study offers a content analysis to answer the following research questions:

1. How many and what types of offensive words are spoken in prime time television?

2. Has there been a decrease in the use of offensive language from the level that existed prior  to the inception of a ratings system (1997 vs. 1994 and 1990)?

3.  Does the new "L" rating accurately reflect the presence of coarse language in Fall, 1997  shows?

4.  To what degree does coarse language occur during the first hour of prime time (8-9 p.m.) when it is likely that more children will be in the viewing audience as well as during the last hour of 10-11 p.m.? 

5. Are stronger words referring to sexual or excretory functions and organs found more often  in a particular program genre (situation comedy, serial/drama, movie, reality)? 

Method

      All prime time programs broadcast by the ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox networks during the non-sweeps weeks of January 17-23, 1990, March 9-15, 1994, and October 27-November 2, 1997 were videotaped.6  These weeks were randomly selected from among non-sweeps weeks.  It was originally planned that data would be collected every four years, however with the implementation of the ratings systems in 1997 that year was selected rather than 1998. A total of 250 programs are included (70 from 1990, 86 from 1994, 94 from 1997) yielding 221.5 hours of programming (70 hours from 1990, 73.5 hours from 1994, 78 from 1997).  Programs excluded from analysis encompass all home video programs, off-network syndicated shows on Fox, and sports programs. 

      Offensive language was coded as either verbal, implied (bleeping out or mouthing of dirty words), gestural (e.g., "giving the finger"), or visual (background graffiti, signs, etc.).  Further, vulgarities were classified into one of four groups: the "seven dirty words," sexual words, excretory words, and "other" offensive words.  For example, "boobs," and "balls" are coded as sexual words, and excretory words are direct references to human waste products and processes.  All remaining words judged to be objectionable (e.g., "hell," "son of a bitch," "bastard," "damn," etc.) are coded as "other."  The "seven dirty words" were classified as such rather than put into one of the other categories because they have been singled out by the FCC as words too indecent to be uttered on the airwaves.  Thus, comparisons could be made between words that are legally barred from television and those words that are considered offensive by the general public. Additionally, the book "Cursing in America" was consulted to determine the level of tabooness of certain words and thus, whether they should be included in the analysis.

      The context in which the words were used was also considered.  For example, the terms "Christ," "Jesus," and "God" were not coded if, for example, they were uttered by a priest or said with reverence. However, a teenager yelling "oh Jesus Christ, just leave me alone" would be coded as a profane use. The age and content ratings of each program were coded7 along with three other program characteristics: type (drama, situation comedy, movie, reality or other), network, and time period. 

       Graduate student coders and the authors worked independently classifying and recording all incidents of crude language. To catch the incidents of offensive language, coders were trained to listen very carefully to the programs and to "talk" along with the characters by repeating the dialogue.  Intercoder agreement (Scott, 1955) for the objectionable words was .91, .86, and .84 in 1990, 1994, and 1997 respectively.

Results

      The analysis of 250 prime time programs on the four major networks yielded 1,293 instances of offensive language and behavior (5.8 incidents per hour).  Six of the coded incidents involve gestures and visual depictions.  All analyses and tables are limited to the verbal delivery of offensive words.  Of these, 1,261 or 98 percent are overt; the remainder is implied (bleeping out or mouthing of dirty words).

      The first analyses examined the frequency of off-color language across the three years studied, and specifically looked for any changes in frequency occurring after age and content ratings were implemented in 1997. A two-sample chi-square test indicates a significant relationship between type of offensive language and year the content was broadcast (X2 = 29.58 (6), p <.001; Cramer's V = .107, p < .001; cf. Table 1). The share of all coarse language represented by “other” expletives declined from 86.7% in 1990 to 76.0% in 1997.  There were, in turn, increases in the proportion of sexual and excretory words during that span.

      There were significantly more objectionable words in evidence in 1994 (X2 = 40.37 (2),

p <.01, one-sample chi-square) than in the other two years examined. The per-hour rate of such verbalizations increased 32.7 percent from 5.5 in 1990 to 7.3 in 1994; their use then decreased 35.6 percent to 4.7 in 1997.  

       As can be seen in Table 1, the most commonly occurring form of crude language is words classified as "other."  For the three years there were 20 instances of the "seven dirty words" supposedly banned from use on commercial television.  Additionally, slightly more than one in six (15.6%) vulgarities are sexual in nature, while excretory references occur infrequently.

      A breakout of specific offending words and phrases reveals that "hell" was the most frequently spoken cuss word, comprising slightly more than one-quarter (28.8%) of all offensive words across the three-year sample.   For instance, in a 1990 episode of Dallas, J. R. Ewing remarks to a worker at an oil rig: "Well, hell I'm not going to quit, you know."  Taken together, "hell," "God/Christ/Jesus," and "damn/Goddamn" account for almost three-quarters (71.3%) of all offensive words. In a 1997 episode of Drew Carey, as the lead character rustles around the kitchen late at night his roommates exclaim "my God, he's sleep eating."  The proportion of  "other" coarse words in 1997 (62.2%) is below that of 1990 (78.9%) and 1994 (72.2%).  An example of a typical utterance of these words include an instance in a 1997 episode of Working when a female office worker cajoles her male colleague to join in a birthday celebration by telling him to "just sign the damn card."

      Stronger words (bastard, bitch, son of a bitch, bullshit, jackass) in the "other" category are more uncommon: 6.5 percent of all coarse language across the three years examined. For example, in the 1997 program C-16, a defendant points a finger at his attorney as he screams "that bitch promised no charges."  Stronger words were used with greater frequency in 1997 (9.3%) than in 1990 or 1994 (5.9% and 5.0%, respectively).

        The other major category of objectionable language observed in all three years, sexual words, is dominated by the use of "ass" and "butt".  A typical example comes from a 1994 airing of Grace Under Fire when Grace yells at her young son, "Get your butt back here!"  Three years later, a secondary male character in Union Square calls to a cross-dresser, "Hey blondie, nice ass!" Other sexual words heard include penis and testicles.  A 1990 episode of Cops showed an undercover officer arresting a male prostitute dressed as a female.  The cop twice asked the prostitute: "You got a penis?"  And, in 1997, the lead character in Dharma explains to her mother-in-law that her husband pulled the "muscle next to his penis." The highly rated Seinfeld show has Jerry telling his friend Elaine that an IQ test might be gender-biased, with lots of questions on "hunting and testicles."

      The word "fuck" found its way into live/news/reality programs in each year examined. The two instances in 1990 were heard in a live broadcast of the American Music Awards.  A member of the group, Guns n' Roses, in making an acceptance speech, uttered the word twice: "I want to thank fucking...oops..." and followed this moments later with thanks to another individual "for fucking getting us there...".   In 1994, "fuck" was implied in three different shows.  One example comes from the news magazine program 20/20.    An owner of a security firm worries about what the police might say to one of his guards found carrying a gun without a license: "What the fuck is wrong with you...?" The owner's words scroll across the bottom of the screen as he speaks, apparently to help viewers make out what is said. Thus, "f---" appears on the screen as he is talking.  And, in 1997, "fuck" made its way onto the airwaves four times in three different programs. For example, in America's Most Wanted, a mother recounts the plight of her mafia-connected son,  "I know what I would call em - fucked."  Although "fucked" was "bleeped" out in the three other incidents occurring in 1997, the intended word was clear to the viewing audience.

       Other examples of the "seven dirty words" found in prime time include "tit," "shit," "piss," and "motherfucker," the latter being implied. For example, in a 1994 airing of the news magazine program 48 Hours a convicted murderer tells an interviewer, "Victims rights isn't victims' shit."   In a 1994 edition of the Fox "reality" show Cops a man who earlier was heard calling two officers "bastards" complains to the police that his handcuffed arms "motherfucking hurt."  The sound is cut out after he begins mouthing the word "fuck."   In a 1997 episode of The Simpsons, Homer is told by a salesman that he has to wait three days to purchase a gun.  Miffed at the sales clerk for enforcing the rules, Homer shuffles out of the gun shop muttering, "Lousy big shit, thinks he's so big."  The 1997 program The Practice contained two instances of "tits."  A judge watching television in his chambers remarks to a group of attorneys, "They don't have titties on All My Children." As he turns his attention back to the television he mutters, "Hmm, titties."  Also in 1997, while NYPD Blue's Detective Sipowicz is roughing up a frightened suspect, he disgustingly asks him "Did you just piss yourself?"

      This study next asked whether the new content ratings accurately reflect the presence of coarse language in Fall, 1997 programs.  Episodes given the "L" rating had a higher rate-per-hour of offensive words and phrases than those with other or no content ratings.  As can be seen in Table 2, language-rated episodes aired 7.6 incidents of offensive language per hour compared to 4.3 incidents per hour in shows not rated for language. Language-rated episodes aired sexual words at slightly more than double the rate per hour than programs that did not have the language rating.  In fact, in L-rated programs the proportion of coarse language occurring in the combined categories of “seven dirty,” sexual and excretory words (38.9%) was twice that found in non-L-rated fare (20.4%).  Of note, five instances of the so-called "seven dirty words" were found in programs that did not contain a warning about potentially objectionable language.

      The four major networks were examined for the prevalence of coarse words in their respective programming. There is a significant relationship (X2 = 57.23 (9), p < .001) between broadcast networks and the amount of offensive speech.  

      NBC was the only major network to not adopt the content ratings system as of October 1997, and it also aired significantly more incidents of objectionable language than the other networks. One-sample chi-square analysis revealed that NBC programs in 1994 and 1997 included significantly more words in the "other" category (X2 = 47.45 (3), p < .001 and X2 = 76.17 (3), p < .001, respectively) and in all words combined (X2 = 40.82 (3), p < .001 and X2 = 55.72 (3), p < .001, respectively) than the other three networks. Additionally, NBC included more instances of these words in 1994 and 1997 than it did in 1990 when CBS aired significantly more "other" vulgarities (X2 = 23.81 (3), p < .001) and more objectionable language in the "all words combined" category than the other networks (X2 = 22.52 (3), p < .01).

      Use of offensive language across prime time hours was examined (see Table 3). For 1994 and for all years combined, the category of language is not related to the time a program was aired.  When 1997 is considered, a significant relationship was found between coarse language and hour of prime time. Viewers were significantly more likely to hear more offensive words during the first two hours of prime time than viewers tuning in during the adult viewing period of 10-11 p.m.

(X2 = 13.73 (2), p < .001, one-sample chi-square).  The share of offensive language represented by sexual words was higher during the 8-9 and 10-11 p.m. hours.  In contrast, the proportion of crude language consisting of “other” words was highest during the 9-10 p.m. hour. 

      Various program genres were compared on their levels of indecent language. A significant relationship was found between off-color words spoken and program type.  For 1997 (X2 = 42.06 (9), p < .001; Cramer’s V = .195, p < .001) and for all years combined (X2 = 129.37 (9), p < .001; Cramer’s V = .183, p < .001; two-sample chi-square test) (see Table 4).

      As can be seen in Table 4, greater amounts of coarse language were heard in both situation comedies and serial dramas in 1997 (X2 = 249.06 (4), p < .001; one sample chi-square test).  When the three sample weeks are combined, again situation comedies and serial dramas dominate in the frequent use of expletives (X2 = 566.65 (4), p < .001). While offensive language was overwhelmingly found in comedies and dramas, 15 of the 20 explicit and implied seven dirty words occurred within a live awards show, news magazine and reality programs. In both 1997 and in all years taken together, within nonfiction programs (news, reality, awards, etc.) a larger proportion of coarse language derived from the category of sexual words.  Within other programs (1997 only), 29.4% of offensive words were sexual (compared to 12.2% - 18.1% in other program genres.  For all years combined, within "other" programs, 25.8% of all offensive words were sexual (compared to 11.8% - 17.7%) for other program genres.

Discussion

      In the past, television carefully controlled the audience's exposure to sensitive words and images, including offensive language and sexual themes. Network censors gave careful scrutiny to scripts and often forced producers to eliminate strong words and titillating scenes.  In recent years the major television networks have reduced their standards and practices departments.  Moreover, intense competition from cable and VCRs has led the networks to an apparent loosening of their prohibition of coarse language.

      The 1993 ABC hit NYPD Blue gained instant notoriety for its use of off-color language and focused the attention of watchdog groups on television's stretching the boundaries of speech in prime time entertainment.  The American Family Association and other groups such as the Family Defense Council and the Christian Coalition have at times been successful in curbing what they deem as objectionable content on television. 

       In the last several years, these and other interest groups successfully pressured Congress to force program distributors to reveal objectionable content through the use of a ratings system. The television industry initiated an age-based rating system that was subsequently rejected by policymakers and concerned groups for inadequately protecting children from inappropriate content.  After much discussion and many battles, the television industry agreed to adopt a content-based rating system to augment age-based ratings.

       Although some viewers strongly believe that television programs contain too much offensive and crude dialogue there have been few studies that support these beliefs and opinions. The few content analyses that do exist have been conducted by activist groups that have an interest in cleaning up broadcast dialogue.  Therefore, the present study examined whether television is offering viewers sexual, excretory, and other offensive words and whether the usage of such words has decreased since the ratings system was put into practice.  The present study included one week of prime time programs videotaped in 1990, in 1994, and three years later after the implementation of both the age and content-based rating systems.

      In 1990 viewers could hear offensive language of one sort or another approximately once every eleven minutes.  By 1994 the rate of off-color words and phrases had grown to nearly once every eight minutes.  However, by 1997 the rate had dropped to nearly once every 13 minutes.

      When specific words are examined, "hell," "damn", "Goddamn", "God8", "Christ9" and "Jesus10 " are the most frequently occurring words vocalized in prime time.  However, the use of these words decreased significantly in 1997 to levels lower than those found in 1990. Although the use of milder swear words decreased in 1997, stronger words such as "bitch," "bastard," "son of a bitch", "bullshit", and "jackass" were heard more frequently than in either of the previous years studied. When broader categories of coarse words are examined, the expression of sexual words almost doubled from 1990 to 1994 but decreased by slightly less than one-third from 1994 to 1997.  However, sexual words as a proportion of all words actually increased from 1990 to 1997.  Although use of excretory words jumped dramatically and the proportion of such words increased from 1990 to 1997, these words are still spoken infrequently. Overall, as the share of sexual and excretory words increased across the years, the share of words in the "other" category decreased. 

      According to the FCC, the "seven dirty words" are considered indecent outside of the safe harbor period, yet this content analysis reveals that five of these words ("tit", "shit," "motherfucker," "piss," and "fuck") have made their way onto the prime time air waves.  Half of the twenty incidents of these words were explicitly voiced; the others were implied.  And, three-quarters were spontaneous, occurring within either a live awards show, news magazine or reality programs containing unscripted segments (e.g., "hidden camera expose").  In the instances where the "seven dirty words" were spontaneously blurted out, the producers chose to air the word or to "bleep" it out rather than cutting the scenes in their entirety.  In a 1994 episode of In Living Color the offending word was written as part of the script, though it was implied (bleeped out or mouthed), and in 1997 four of the "seven dirty words" were scripted and explicitly stated in three programs.

      A content-based ratings system was implemented in October 1997 to alert viewers to objectionable content such as sexual scenes, violence, and offensive language.   Programs designated with the "language" rating aired more off-color words and phrases and more sexual words per hour than programs with other or no content ratings.  Coarse words could be heard once every eight minutes on language-rated programs and once every 14 minutes on non-language rated programs.  The occurrence of "seven dirty," "sexual," and "excretory words" in language rated shows was twice the proportion found in non-L-rated programs.  NBC is the only major network that refuses to adopt content-based ratings and its programs also contained more incidents of crude language than the other networks in 1997 (and in 1994 when a ratings system did not exist).

      To minimize children's exposure to strong language, including expressions deemed indecent, the FCC requires that such presentations be limited to "safe harbors" when children are less likely to be watching television.  Therefore, it would seem to follow that objectionable language would be used sparingly, if at all, during the earliest prime time hour, the former "family hour."  However, in 1997 viewers were more likely to hear offensive words during the first two hours of prime time than during the later hour.  In 1997 sexual words made up a larger proportion of the strong language found in the earliest and latest prime time hours, whereas in the 9-10 p.m. hour "other" words made up for the decline in sexual words.   

      Analysis of offensive words by program genre reveals that comedies tends to be dominated by "milder" words such as "hell, "damn," "God", "Christ," and "Jesus."  If the number of situation comedies on television continues to increase it is expected that the viewing audience will, in turn, be exposed to a greater number of mild cuss words.  For instance, this study found that in 1994 and 1997, the NBC network aired a greater number of sitcoms and thus subjected the viewing audience to more offensive words than did any of the other networks.

      Regardless of whether objectionable language is written as dialogue or voiced on live programs it is still being heard by the viewing audience.  Although the band member from Guns n' Roses ignited controversy in 1990 with his excited yet offensive acceptance speech, many other swear words seem to have gone by largely without criticism and without FCC intervention until the mid-1990s when concerned parents, religious and other activist groups took notice and called on Congress to take action. After the implementation of content-based ratings in 1997, the overall use of offensive language has dropped to a level lower than found in both 1990 and 1994.

      Content analysis limits this study's findings to the frequency and use of offensive language on television. While these results measure the amount of coarse language delivered on the airwaves they do not examine the effects of such language on children.  Many parents fear that children will imitate dirty language, become verbally aggressive and insulting or otherwise engage in antisocial behaviors that are learned from watching television.  Future research could examine the effects of children's exposure to indecent language on television.  Additionally, cultivation studies may discover whether heavier viewers are less likely to notice offensive words and more inclined to use these words themselves.  Still other research could examine whether television viewers are desensitized or whether they "hear" objectionable language as well as gauging their reactions to it.  Finally, study of a greater number of broadcast and cable television channels is warranted to gain a better sense of the amount and kinds of potentially objectionable language to which viewers are exposed.

Table 1

Number of Incidents and Rate Per Hour of Offensive Language 
 
 
 

                            Years

       1990 1994 1997 Combined 

       No. of Rate per No. of  Rate per No. of Rate per No. of Rate per 

       Incidents hour Incidents hour Incidents hour Incidents hour 
 

Seven Dirty Words 3 0.04 9 0.12 8 0.10 20 0.09  

Sexual Words 47a 0.67 91b 1.25 63a 0.80 201 0.91 

Excretory Words 1 0.01 7 0.09 17 0.22 25 0.11 

Other Words 333b 4.76 429c 5.86 279a 3.62 1041 4.70 

All Categories 

Combined 384a 5.50 536b 7.30 367a 4.70 1287 5.80 
 

For the relationship between Category of Language and Year, X2 = 29.58 (6), p < .001 by two-sample chi-square test (cf. Frey et al., 1991) and Cramer’s V = .107, p < .001.  For follow-up comparisons across Years (horizontal comparisons) values with different superscripts differ by p < .01 (one-sample chi-square test). 

Table 2

Offensive Language Within "Language" Rated Programs1 
 
 

       "Language" Rated  "Other" Rated

       Programs2 Programs 

       Number of Incidents Rate per hour3 Number of Incidents Rate per hour4 
 
 

Seven Dirty Words 3 .32 5 .07      

Sexual Words 15a 1.58 48b .70 

Excretory Words 10 1.05 7 .10 

Other Words 44a 4.63 235b 3.43 

All Categories Combined 72a 7.57 295b 4.30 
 
 

For the relationship between Category of Language and Language Rating, X2 = 21.52 (3), p < .001 by two-sample chi-square test and Cramer’s V = .242, p < .001. For follow-up comparisons across program genre (horizontal comparisons), values with different superscripts differ by p < .01 (one-sample chi-square test).  

1.  Rating System for 1997 programs only.

2.   Includes programs with content ratings of "L-Language",  "V & L - Violence and Language", and "S, L, D - Sex, Language and Suggestive Dialogue".

3. 13 programs totaling 9.5 hours of viewing.

4.  81 programs totaling 68.5 hours of viewing. 
 

Table 3

Offensive Language Spoken Within Prime Time Hours1 
 
 
 

       19902 1994

       8-9pm 9-10pm 10-11pm 8-9pm 9-10pm 10-11pm 
 

Seven Dirty Words 0 3 0  2 2 5

Sexual Words 15 14 18 36 38 17 

Excretory Words 1 0 0 3 2 2 

Other Words 82 136 114 147 155 127 

All Categories Combined 98 153 132 188 197 151 
 

       1997 All Years Combined

       8-9pm 9-10pm 10-11pm 8-9pm 9-10pm 10-11pm 
 

Seven Dirty Words 3 2 3 5  7  8  

Sexual Words 28 14 19 80 66 54

Excretory Words 3  5 9 7 7 11 

Other Words   104b 117b 57a 334  410 300 

All Categories Combined  138b 138b 88a 424 488 371 
 
 

For the relationship between Category of Language and Hour in 1997, X2 = 17.63 (6), p < .05 by two-sample chi-square test and Cramer’s V = .156, p < .05. For 1994 and for All Years Combined, the two-sample chi-square value did not reach significance.  For 1997 follow-up comparisons across Hours  (horizontal comparisons) values with different superscripts differ by p < .01 (one-sample chi-square test). 

1 Excludes the 7-8 p.m. Sunday prime time hour (for which there were four incidents of objectionable words across the three years under study).  

2 Chi-square test was not conducted for 1990 data due to the number of cells with less than five observations. 
 

Table 4

Number of Incidents and Rate Per Hour of Offensive Language 

                                    1990      1994 

              Serial/     Serial/  

       Drama Sitcom  Movie Other Drama Sitcom Movie   Other 
 

Seven Dirty Words 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 8 

Sexual Words 11 8 16 12 20 49 13 9 

Excretory Words 0 0 1 0 2 4 0 0 

Other Words 153 38 129 13 104 198 86 41 

All Categories Combined  164 46 147 27 126 252 99 59 

Number of Hours 30.0 10.5 21.0 8.5 21.0 22.0 17.0 13.5   

Incidents per Hour 5.5 4.4 7.0 3.2 6.0 11.5 5.8 4.2 
 
 

                                    1997     All Years Combined 

              Serial/     Serial/  

       Drama Sitcom  Movie Other Drama Sitcom Movie   Other 
 

Seven Dirty Words 3 0 0 5 3 1 1 15 

Sexual Words 25 23 5 10  56c 80d 34b 31a 

Excretory Words 11 5 1 0  13 9 2 1 

Other Words 99 126 35 19 356 362 250 73 

All Categories Combined  138c 154c 41b 34a 428c 452c 287b 120   

Number of Hours 31.0 19.5 12.0 15.5 82.0 52.0 50.0 37.5   

Incidents per Hour 4.4 7.9 3.4 2.2 5.2 8.7 5.7 3.2 
 

For the relationship between Category of Language and Program Genre, X2 = 42.06 (9), p < .001 (1997) and X2 = 129.37 (9), p < .001 (all years combined) by two-sample chi-square test. Cramer’s V = .195 and .183 for 1997 and for all years combined, respectively (for both, p < .001). 

For follow-up comparisons across program genre (horizontal comparisons), values with different superscripts differ by

p < .01 (one-sample chi-square test).  
 
 

Footnotes

1 Seven dirty words- shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits.

2 The TV ratings implementation group, headed by Motion Picture Association of America President Jack Valenti, created six categories: TV-Y (suitable for all children), TV-Y7 (directed to older children), TV-G (general audience), TV-PG (parental guidance suggested), TV-14 (parents strongly cautioned), and TV-M (mature audiences only)(Fleming, 1996).

3 At this writing NBC and the cable network BET had declined to adopt the content-based ratings system.

4 The three major networks agreed in 1975 to set aside the first hour of prime time for programming suitable for all ages.  The so-called "family hour" was challenged in court and struck down in 1976.  Until recently, the networks have generally observed the spirit of the family hour by airing material inappropriate for children after 9 p.m.

5 ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, UPN, WB.

6  PrimeTime Live and Brooklyn South were preempted on Mon. 10/27/97, and thus was taped on Mon. 11/3/97. C-16 and Total Security were preempted on Sat. 11/1/97 and were thus taped on Sat. 11/8/97. Due to technical difficulties Living Single was taped 11/6/97, Millennium on 11/7/97, and The Practice  on 11/15/97.

7  1997 only, ratings systems were not used in 1990 and 1994.

8,9,10  Only profane uses of  "God" "Jesus" and "Christ" were coded.   

References 

      Action for Children's Television v. FCC.  852 F.2d 1992, 1341  (D.C. Cir. 1988).

      Action for Children's Television v. FCC.  932 F.2d 1504, 1508  (D.C. Cir. 1991).

      Albiniak, P.  (1997, July 14). Ratings get revamped.  Broadcasting & Cable, 4,6,10.

      Bailey, L., & Timm L. A. (1976). More on women's - and - men's expletives.

      Anthropological Linguistics, 18 (9) 438-449.

      Bechloss, S.  (1990, May 7).  Making the rules in prime time.  Channels, 23-27.

      Cameron, P. (1969). Frequency and kinds of words in various social settings, or what the  

hell is going on? Pacific Sociological Review, 12, 101-104. 

      Cameron, P. (1970). The words college students use and what they talk about. Journal of  

Communication Disorders, 3, 36-46. 

      Coe, S.  (1993, November 1).  'NYPD Blue': rocky start, on a roll.  Broadcasting & Cable, 18-20.

      Condry, J. (1989). The Psychology of Television. Lawrence Erlbaum: Hillsdale.

      Doctor, D.  (1992).  An alternative justification for regulating broadcast indecency. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 36, 245-247.

      Donnerstein, E., Wilson, B., & Linz, D.  (1992).  On the regulation of broadcast indecency to protect children.  Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 36, 111-117.

      Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation. 438 U.S. 726  (1978).

      Frey, L. R., Botan, C. H., Friedman, P. G., & Kreps, G. L. (1991). Investigating communication: An introduction to research methods. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall

      Greenberg, B.S.  (1994).  Content trends in media sex.  In Zillmann, D., Bryant, J., and Huston, A.C.(eds.),  Media, Children and The Family.  Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

      Griffiths, M. D., & Shuckford, G. L. J. (1989). Desensitization to television violence: A new model. New Ideas in Psychology, 7 (1) 85-89.

      Hill, D., & Weingrad, J.  (1986).  The fine art of tasteless television.  American Film, 11, 27.

      Jay, T. (1980).  A frequency count of college and elementary school students' colloquial English. Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 1.

      Jay, T. (1992). Cursing in America. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

      Johnson, T.  (1996, February 8).  A Vanishing Haven: The Decline of the Family Hour.  Parents Television Council.

      Johnson, T.  (1997a, February 11). A Ratings Report Card.  Parents Television Council.

      Johnson, T.  (1997b, May 8). The 'Family Hour': No Place for Your Kids.  Parents Television Council.

      Johnson F. L., & Fine M. G. (1985). Sex differences in uses and perceptions of obscenity. Women's Studies in Communication, 8, 11-24.

      Kaye, B.K., & Fishburne, L.M.  (1997).  NYPD Blue and media hype: An analysis of sex and indecent language.  New Jersey Journal of Communication, 5, 84-103.

      Leland, J., Fleming, C., Miller, M., & Smith, V.E.  (1993, December 13).  Blue in the night.  Newsweek, 56-59.

      Lieberman, J.  (1996, February 9).  Keynote address to the International Radio and Television Society.

      Mabry, E. A. ( 1975). A multivariate investigation of profane language.  Central States Speech Journal, 26, 39-44.

      MacDonald, F. J. (1994). One Nation Under Television.  Nelson - Hall: Chicago.

      McQuail, D. (1992). Media Performance.  London: Sage Publications.

      National Television Violence Study 2.  (1997). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

      Oh, #'*c!! (1994, May/June). Psychology Today, p. 20-21.  

      Oliver M. M., & Rubin J. (1975).  The use of expletives by some American women.  Anthropological Linguistics, 17 (5) 191-197.

      Polskin, H. (1989, January 7).  TV's getting sexier...How far will it go?  TV Guide,

16-21.

      Rieber, R. W., Wiedemann, C., & D'Amato, J. (1979). Obscenity: Its frequency and context of usage as compared in males, nonfeminist females, and feminist females.  Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 8 (3), 201-223.

      Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of content analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 19,

321-325.

      Staley, C. M. (1978). Male-Female use of expletives: A heck of a difference in expectations. Anthropological Linguistics, 20 (8) 367-380.

      Tan, A. S. (1985) Communication Theory and Research.  Wiley: New York.

      Telecommunications Act of 1996. Title 47, U.S.C., Section 551 (1996).