No more smut, filth and obscenity...

...Well, not as much, anyway.

Since my last post on Smut, filth and obscenity...? there have been some interesting developments in the whole 'swearing on the BBC' row. According to this article, there is to be a crack down on the use of 'foul language' following "a review of bad language across the corporation's services".

Commissioned in response to what has come to be known as 'Sachsgate' (nice word formation there), the review comments not only on Jonathan Ross's use of taboo language but also makes the observation that Ross's language is frequently "gratuitous and unnecessarily offensive" and concedes that "it is possible that some language alienates some audiences unnecessarily". Who those audiences are, though, is not necessarily easy to determine - language that, for one person, is gratuitous and offensive might be considered by another person to be harmless and humourous self-expression. The BBC's recently-revised guidelines on offensive language take this point on board.

The guidelines state:

There is no consensus about words that are acceptable, when, and by whom.
Different words cause different degrees of offence in different parts of the
world. So a person's age, sex, education, employment, belief, nationality, and
where they live, all impact on whether or not they might be offended.

They also comment on what constitutes the most offensive language:

Language that causes most offence includes:• sexual swearwords• terms of racist
abuse• terms of sexual and sexist abuse or abuse referring to sexuality•
pejorative terms relating to illness or disabilities• casual or derogatory use
of holy names or religious words and especially in combination with other
offensive language.

As a father of three young children, I'm also relieved to read that the BBC guidelines stipulate that they "do not include any offensive language in pre-school children's programmes or websites (four years and under)". Glad to hear it!! After all, can you imagine Iggle-Piggle shouting the F-word at Macca-Pacca? Or PC Plum branding the youth of Balamory "a load of little s***s"? A little less reassuring, though, is the next line of the guidelines, which states that "We (the BBC) must not include offensive language in programmes or websites made for younger children except in the most exceptional circumstances". Except in the most exceptional circumstances??? I dread to think what that might mean...