Read the FCC's Crank Mail About Saturday Night Live

One viewer said it should be illegal to take the Lord's name in vain on TV—and that was one of the more coherent complaints.

Is it a crime to take the Lord's name in vain on TV? Someone in Davidson, North Carolina, seems to think so, judging from a list of citizen complaints about Saturday Night Live submitted to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from January 2023 to February 2024.

"Someone on Saturday night live said God's name in vain!!!!" the viewer complained. "This is illegal on network tv!!!!"

One viewer from Easton, Pennsylvania groaned that Saturday Night Live showed images of "a young man doing cocaine with a spoon," helpfully including a YouTube link of the offending skit.

"This is highly inappropriate. It exposes minors as well as other viewers to illicit drug use. It shows how to use the drug, what form it comes in, and where it is usually consumed," the viewer wrote. "This is cannot [sic] be good for people. SNL and comedy should be funny but this is crass. What next? Shooting heroin, smoking crack on SNL?"

An incoherent, rambling complaint sent from Woodland Hills, California ended with the claim that the musician "Maxx Morando looks like a rapist, a racist, and a sexist pig."

The complaints were obtained by Brooke Germain, an editor at The Nevada Sagebrush, under the Freedom of Information Act and posted to the public records platform MuckRock.

The FCC noted 20 complaints about Saturday Night Live in total, 19 of them about "indecency" and one about poorly timed closed captions. In total, the commission received 2,440 television indecency complaints in 2023. That's a far cry from the days of the Parents Television Council's mass campaigns more than a decade ago, which sometimes generated 179,997 complaints in a single month.

Some of the complaints about Saturday Night Live focused on specific episodes. Six viewers claimed that a December 9 sketch mocking the congressional hearings over campus antisemitism was making light of a serious issue. Two viewers huffed that a parody of the Oscars red carpet show was encouraging anti-Irish racism.

Other complaints were less specific. "Tired of seeing violence being portrayed as funny in todays [sic] climate when a new mass shooting happens everyday," a viewer from Troy, Ohio, wrote.

Then there were six complaints about the word "goddamn." These complainants avoided actually spelling out the curse; they referred to it by the euphemisms "GD" or "saying the Lord's name in vain." One viewer from Des Moines, Iowa, called it "decadent and abhorrent" to use that word in a joke about Hillary Clinton threatening to commit suicide.

A complainant from Pinehurst, North Carolina, was angry Saturday Night Live parodied Donald Trump comparing himself to Jesus on Easter.

The FCC has long tried to censor profanity in the media, becoming the butt of jokes—and provoking more censorship.

After a radio station aired a George Carlin routine about the "seven dirty words you can't say on television," an angry listener complained to the FCC, leading eventually to a 1978 Supreme Court ruling that the FCC has the power to ban "obscene" content from broadcast media and to restrict "indecent" or "profane" content to certain hours of the day.

In the early 21st century, the Parents Television Council used FCC complaints as a weapon in its war against Family Guy. (That's the source of the 179,997 complaints in a month.) Family Guy responded with an entire episode mocking FCC censorship, complete with a song that purposely pushed the limits of indecency and profanity rules.

But these complaints are increasingly futile. The FCC can't regulate indecency and profanity on streaming services and other digital media, which are becoming more popular than broadcast media. As Reason's Jacob Sullum wrote in 2012, kids these days "do not know or care what 'broadcast television' is, and they certainly do not perceive a categorical distinction between 'over-the-air' channels and the rest."

The final blow to FCC censorship may have come from former president Donald Trump, whose on-air curses broke any remaining taboo. "It could be that it's harder for this FCC to prioritize going after broadcasters for things like indecency or profanity when the president himself has shown his indifference," Axios reported in 2020.

Comments

[Brandybuck]

Comments from the 70s when the show was brand new? Back in the heyday of Father Guido Sarducci? NOPE! This is from the last year. People are genuinely shitting their pants over taking the Lords Name in vain on television in 2023/2024.

God damn, are these people serious?

[Brandybuck]

Also have to say, after several days being Internet free, coming back is putting me into depression. The Internet is a reminder that people are fundamentally stupid assholes.

[Longtobefree]

What amazed me is that people still watch SNL.

[mad.casual]

What amazed me was the regurgitation of the Axios suggestion that Trump was the Reason that, in 2020, FCC censorship took a backseat.

There are *still* a whole lot of journalists, activists, and TDS sufferers out there that need to be hit with baseball bats until they scream "STOP! STOP! I GET IT! I'M SORRY!" and then have a coin flipped to determine if the person stops hitting them for their stupidity/duplicity.

JFC.

[MrMxyzptlk]

I figured the complaints would be about accuracy in advertising. Advertising SNL as a comedy is false advertising.

[mad.casual]

People are genuinely shitting their pants over taking the Lords Name in vain on television in 2023/2024.

Of course, there are complaints about (not) erasing Hitler’s name and anit-semitic and anti-racist jokes and pro-rape culture jokes but, sure, when *you* come in from being out of touch with modern society for several days it’s only those religious idiots that seem like kooks.

Because it’s not really about pointing out regulations on free speech, it’s about impugning those other out of touch idiots.

[Nobartium]

Contrary to what you think, people in this country are getting more religious, not less.

[MrMxyzptlk]

They are also getting more stupid. Coincidence? I think not.

[MrMxyzptlk]

Jesus Fucking Christ on a God Damned Pogo Stick. You'd think the fucking Raghead Religious Fanatics would make the whole flat earth young creationist religious fanatics feel stupid and shut them the fuck up.

[Vernon Depner]

He saved the "it's Trump's fault!" for the end.

[n00bdragon]

I understand your concerns, but frankly we have more important things to worry about. Like what? Like everything. Every issue is more important than this.

[mad.casual]

I understand your concerns,

I “don’t”. It seems to, in a very bad faith “cut the 1A baby in half” fashion, deride the use of or regard for religious profanity more than it criticizes or calls for the elimination of the FCC.

It further completely ignores the fact that Section 230 and various quangos like the PMRC and ESRB and efforts like the FEPA are just as much responsible for this idiocy today as any back hills redneck, baiting social activist, or socially unstable pro-Bernie frat bro trannie filing a complaint with the FCC.

[B G]

The "1A baby" was cut in half years ago, and the FCC didn't even have to get involved. DHS, FBI, and FTC swung the axe, while WHO, CDC, and NIH held the kid onto the chopping block.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

It's a stupid pointless article which would have been a fantastic vehicle for pointing out that when government has a reputation for poking its nose into people's lives, people will try to sic government on those they don't like.

It can't be said too often: the more government minds everybody's business, the more people find it literally more profitable, both emotionally and financially, to sic government on people they don't like.

The problem is always the mere existence of government. The only solution is to shrink government down so small that it's the last place the cranks think of complaining to. All these letters should have been written to SNL itself, not the government.

Fire KMW.
Move out of DC.
Think liberty first.

[n00bdragon]

The FCC isn't investigating SNL. It's literally just 20 dumbasses who put something in the complaints box and a government records request demanded that everything in the complaints box be turned up. None of the complaints are even prima facie valid. No one is investigating anything. There's no overreach to complain about here: Nothing is happening. Mr. Petti is handwringing that out of a nation of 300 million people, out of which according to Nielsen about 5 million predictably watch SNL, 20 of them (0.0004%) had a problem with given episode.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

The problem is not the FCC investigating. The problem is all those people wanting the FCC to investigate. They are abrogating their responsibility to the government instead of taking their complaints to SNL. They are trying to force government coercion.

And it's not just 20 people and not just SNL.

In total, the commission received 2,440 television indecency complaints in 2023.

Don't try to downplay the problem itself or its magnitude.

[n00bdragon]

I don't need to downplay the magnitude of the problem. It downplays itself. 2440 people out of 333,000,000 complained to the FCC about something. 0.000733%. That's assuming all the complaints came from different people and that one crackpot wasn't persistently sending in complaints. 0.000733% is not a constituency. They can't get anyone elected to do their bidding. This is as close to a non-issue as any issue will ever get.

[mad.casual]

And again, just the sample labeled "SNL" indicates the complaints vary from people complaining that Hitler wasn't erased to anti-Semitism to rape culture.

It's like people pointing out that the "T" in LGBT 'culture' is a tiny, borderline insane, vocal fraction of the electorate that's best ignored and Reason saying, "Hold my beer and medically-preserved testicles..."

The FCC could be ended entirely but that's not what's being demanded or really suggested here. The problem here would seem to be that government agencies accept complaints and/or that any such complaint departments don't have the ability to filter the complaints before they pick up the phone/open their email.

[John W Berresford]

I worked at the FCC for years, sometimes in the media area. There were worse 'complaints'! The amount of time it took just to handle them was a scandalous waste of time, human labor, and taxpayer dollars.

[Cloudbuster]

How dare the opinions of the proles get in the way of the work of our sainted bureaucrats!

[B G]

The Agency which took more than a year to actually institute the announced change in the GMRS license fee is generally inefficient? Shocking....

Did you ever have anything to do with the upkeep on the licensing website? If that site had been put together by a couple of interns in 1995 as a site for a private business, everyone involved would have been fired for constructing such a shitshow. I spent a few years working as a "programmer/intern" for a database application developer whose tech was based on mainframe/terminal tech originally created in 1972, and if I'd ever built an environment that looked like the FCC system, I'd have at least gotten a serious lecture about usability in application setups.

It baffles me that anyone could think such an organization can comprehend, let alone regulate the internet in more general terms.

[mad.casual]

The final blow to FCC censorship may have come from former president Donald Trump, whose on-air curses broke any remaining taboo. "It could be that it's harder for this FCC to prioritize going after broadcasters for things like indecency or profanity when the president himself has shown his indifference," Axios reported in 2020.

Or, you know, religious activists and others had more to worry about with regard to brutal oppression and censorship in 2020... you lying, disingenuous, shit-for-brains, motherfucking asshat.

[B G]

If only anyone working at/around Axios had any awareness of the year 1991.

Part of what set the stage for the organized complaint campaigns of the early 2000s was the continual retreat of FCC restrictions as the TV networks continually pushed various limits after HW Bush said in a national speech that "We're going to kick Sadaam Hussein's ass." Ass being a word which would have gotten NBC fined if it had been used on SNL in 1989 or 1990.

[Dillinger]

dead honkey!

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Reading this pointless article about an inconsequential issue that doesn't affect me even slightly is time I will never get back. What 3 letter agency can I complain to?

[Its_Not_Inevitable]

""Maxx Morando looks like a rapist, a racist, and a sexist pig.""

OK, so I had no idea who Maxx Morando was but felt compelled to look him up. And damn, but I can only agree with those sentiments. What a creepy looking dude.

[Cloudbuster]

"One viewer said it should be illegal to take the Lord's name in vain on TV—and that was one of the more coherent complaints."

There's nothing at all "incoherent" about that complaint. It just doesn't align with modern notions of liberal democracy. A 17th century man would have found such an idea completely uncontroversial.

The jury is still out on whether secular liberal democracy represents an improvement on 17th century man's beliefs.

[MasterThief]

An average person from a few decades ago would agree. Tbh, most tv now has a ton of content that would be considered shockingly over the line a few decades ago and realistically most of it isn't suitable for children.
That said, nobody gives a fuck about SNL or the people complaining about it to the FCC. The writing has sucked for so long (IMO at least since Jimmy Fallon became their star). Fuck the irrelevant FCC in the age of streaming. I haven't had cable in something like 20 years.

[Cloudbuster]

"This is highly inappropriate. It exposes minors as well as other viewers to illicit drug use. It shows how to use the drug, what form it comes in, and where it is usually consumed," the viewer wrote. "This is cannot [sic] be good for people. SNL and comedy should be funny but this is crass. What next? Shooting heroin, smoking crack on SNL?"

There is also nothing incoherent or inappropriate about this opinion. This was conventional wisdom under the Hayes code up through the 1950s, and even after the Hayes code was abandoned, prime time television avoided showing such things.

[MasterThief]

Now every show is full of drugs, sex, swearing, etc. I love South Park and enjoy plenty of shows with these adult themes, but this shit is shoved into everything in an excessive manner that actually just becomes annoying (not to mention completely inappropriate for the preteen crowd they're aiming for)

[mad.casual]

but this shit is shoved into everything in an excessive manner that actually just becomes annoying

Almost deliberately, indistinguishably from pointless trolling or baiting. Like half of everything Hollywood or the Media has done since Endgame and before.

Yeah, at one point in the late 90s, early 00s even lesbians were deriding the occasional bolted-on lesbian kiss or relationship as pointless, obligatory catering to the male gaze (as though only women know how to view other women as sex objects the right way) and the bolted-on lesbian relationship, which may or may not be boiled down to a kiss or less, has only become more ubiquitous and pointlessly obligatory since then.

[mad.casual]

The oblivious irony of Matthew Petti declaring his cause noble and his one path the true path against people who would dare question the media's ability to invoke the Lord's divine will in support of frivolity is humorous.

Like Petti and the other "ladies" are standing around the phones at the FCC waiting to throw rocks at anyone who calls in and says the program wasn't fit for Jehovah.

[AT]

They should really be complaining about the fact that SNL promises comedy and almost never delivers anymore.

Say, just out of curiosity, how well would it go over if they started doing some jokes about trans/gay people? Or maybe have a guy dress up as Muhammed and make a joke about his child brides. Or a joke that involves a school shooter. You know what would crack me up? A skit where some rainbow/climate/Palestine protesters block a freeway, and they cut to their new comedic hero Confederate Flag Truck Guy who says in a deep southern drawl, "I'll solve this here problem!" and then hilariously runs them all down and does burnouts on their flags/posters screaming "YEEE-HAW!" out his window. Or how about a skit where someone impersonates Joe Biden and spends the entire time falling up the stairs, falling asleep at the podium, and pooping his pants.

Would we similarly point out those complaints as "incoherent, rambling"? Or are some sacred cows more sacred than others?

[shadydave]

20 complaints in one year. 20. In a country of well over 300 million people.

[Moderation4ever]

What is funny about George Carlin's piece is that when he first performed it many of the words were not used in common speech. You might hear them in locker room or job site but not in common language. Kids learned the words from their friends. Now of course children learn most of the words from their parents. TV shows on the common carriers still have to censor words but most people know exactly what has been said right through the "bleeps".

[One-Punch_Man]

What about taking Mohammad's name in vain? Or you know saying Palestine elected Hamas and have to live with it? Wait or show a picture of Mohammad?

I agree it's silly to be concerned about the Lord's name in vain. I'm not religious. But as South Park showed in the past, you can make fun of Christians because they take it. Others are off limits.

MrMxyzptlk for people getting stupider, well Biden did get 81 million votes on being a uniter, and great foreign policy - which was never seen in the past.