So long, first amendment. It was nice knowing you.

Apparently the FCC has decided that it wants to throw context right out the window:

In a petition filed last month with the F.C.C., a group representing other media organizations objected to a portion of the Bono decision in which the commission said it would now consider any use of the vulgarity in question to have a sexual connotation, regardless of the context. (Bono used that graphic expletive as an adjective in accepting an award.)

Now I don't find much use for "colorful language" in my own speech, but I can see how some people might get so excited that they just blurt out such a word. In most cases, the slip-up isn't really a matter of having a sexual connotation. To assume that there is one whether there is or not is to subvert completely any sort of standards in broadcasting.

As a consequence of this, there is nothing to stop the FCC from going further and classifying further words as "off-limits"--or ruling that certain contexts are no longer permitted. At that point, you're not that far off from state-controlled media. Think recent Iranian politics, and you might have an idea where the bottom of this slippery slope might lead.