In honor of Veterans Day, ABC had made plans to show Steven Spielberg's World War II drama, Saving Private Ryan. Showing this movie on television was not a new idea; in 2001 and 2002 the film, which has an explicitly violent scene of the D-day invasion at Omaha Beach, was shown uncut and uninterrupted. This year, however, over 60 ABC affiliates decided to cut the film from the intended lineup. The reason: the networks' newfound fear of the Federal Communications Commission. Since the F.C.C.'s recent fines levied on CBS for Janet Jackson's now famous "wardrobe malfunction," stations are running scared. This decision opens up the highly debated topic of first amendment rights. Networks fear their licensing, funding or other government controlled entities could possibly be revoked. This fear has grave implications. Namely, what other programs and content will the government soon be able to backhandedly control? Could the news become affected? Will ABC and other networks refuse to mention a possible criticism of our government officials because they fear punishment? If the airwaves belong to us, the American people, shouldn't we have more of a say as to what gets aired, rather than trusting some offices up in Washington? Our constitution guarantees us a freedom of free speech, and by looks of things, that guarantee is not being afforded.

More over, besides the possible First Amendment violation issues that this brings, I question the state of television and our culture in general. Clearly networks are afraid of the F.C.C. and are not willing to compromise with them, so they just give in. However, I find it particularly interesting that while the networks refuse to air such important, and frankly, educational programs such as Saving Private Ryan, they have no problems with some of the lewd and raunchy reality shows that air.

No one batted a serious eye during the first season of Survivor when contestant Richard Hatch wandered around the island completely naked. We have shows such as Fear Factor that show bikini-clad women dunking their heads in buckets of cow blood looking for a prize. Almost daily, we have reality shows that constantly push the F.C.C.'s limit on sex, nudity and profanity.

Furthermore, what are the future social implications of plastic surgery-based reality shows. Essentially, these programs tell women and men, "Hey, if you don't like your looks, then just come on our show and we'll rip you apart and put you back together in a way that you like better?" Fox's The Swan is one such show that tells women they cannot be beautiful unless they shrink their waistline and grow their bustline. Women have been battling these stereotypes for years and it seemed like we were finally getting somewhere, that is until the wonders of reality TV set us back a generation or two.

The issue of television censorship has other implications. Those issues could never be explored in today's severely politically correct environment. What has happened in the past 30 years that would change our "moral codes?" Why was using the "n"-word on The Jeffersons pioneering because it took away from the sting of its connotation, but on episodes re-run today, it is bleeped out? In fact, what has happened since 2002 when Saving Private Ryan was last shown in ABC? As Frank Rich wrote in the New York Times, "This is McCarthyism, 'moral values' style."

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention the most recent F.C.C. debacle. During Monday night football recently, a promo ran for the ABC show, Desperate Housewives. This ad depicted actress Nicollette Sheridan and NFL star Terrell Owens in a locker room. After some flirting, she dropped her towel and they embraced. This infuriated viewers who lodged numerous complaints to the F.C.C.

I would like to make an obvious comparison here. Saving Private Ryan was going to be shown with a rating and a warning that the show would contain violence and possible offensive language. Monday night football was not. It is more than likely that children were watching the game, as they were during the Superbowl. Furthermore, since the ad has garnered so much press attention, it has been played and replayed on television and on the internet. Its accessibility is much more widespread than Saving Private Ryan.

I'm still trying to figure out what was so bad about showing Saving Private Ryan. We clearly have no problem showing a lot of skin on TV. It happens every day in prime-time, late-night and even day-time TV (Have you ever seen a soap opera? Those can be much racier than that football commercial!). So why was it so offensive?

The inconsistencies on this issue are astounding and I am not quite sure what we should make of them. However, I do know that we need to reevaluate what is important to us as a society and choose our battles. We cannot allow our right to the airwaves to be toyed with. As Americans, we own the airwaves and deserve to have them treated as such. I hope that we can come to a more consistent set of morals when it comes to television and that the current inconsistencies will fade into history, never to be repeated again.

Editor's note: Judith Lupatkin is a member of the class of 2005.