The Dialogue
Abstract
This paper examines the role of public administration in shaping and restricting comedic expression in the United States, specifically focusing on the FCC’s regulation of broadcast media, targeting stand-up comedians and late-night show hosts. By applying Weber's and Wilson's theories of bureaucracy the paper analyzes how administrative power influences the boundaries of acceptable speech, through legal frameworks and discourse theory. An important court case involving governmental regulation of comedic speech was the FCC v. Pacifica Foundation. This case sets the stage for administrative power to grow in terms of limiting freedom of speech and paving the way for new administrations, such as the Trump administration, to come into power and target late-night show hosts (Jimmy Kimmel) based on political opinions, which exemplifies a clear overreach of authority. A comparison with censorship practices in Nazi Germany is important to understand just how easy it is for a government to dominate discourse during politically sensitive times. Although the United States operates within a democratic system that provides constitutional protections, these cases demonstrate how bureaucratic mechanisms, legal standards, and public pressure can still limit comedic expression. This analysis focuses on the governmental practices that can lead to a clear violation of constitutional liberties, that often target the comedic industry, as satire is often used as a form of political resistance.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
Recommended Citation
Gavin, Campbell E.
(2026)
"Government Censorship in Comedy,"
The Dialogue: Vol. 12:
Iss.
1, Article 1.
Available at:
https://scholar.smu.edu/thedialogue/vol12/iss1/1
