438 U.S. 726 (1978)
After the radio station broadcast a humorist's monologue containing indecent language, the FCC issued an order that the language was patently offensive, although not obscene.
- The Court held that the FCC's action was constitutionally permissible.
- The action was not forbidden "censorship" within the meaning of 47 U.S.C.S. § 326 because that statute did not limit the FCC's authority to impose sanctions on licensees who engaged in obscene, indecent, or profane broadcasting.
- The monologue was indecent under 18 U.S.C.S. § 1464 because it did not conform to accepted standards of morality; prurient appeal was not an essential component of indecent language.
- Thus, there was no basis for disagreeing with the FCC's conclusion that indecent language was used in the broadcast.
- Content that was vulgar, offensive, and shocking was not entitled to absolute protection under the First Amendment.
The judgment reversing the FCC's order was reversed.