Court Not Buying FCC's Claims Over Indecency Fines
from the where-are-the-parents? dept
As many of you are aware, the FCC in the last few years has spent an awful lot of time on television indecency issues -- though they seem to do so not because of any real offense, but because certain family groups flood the FCC with complaints, often long after a TV show actually aired. The FCC refuses to give TV broadcasters any guidelines or preview any content, noting that that would be "censorship." Instead, they give vague guidelines and will only fine you if you fail to meet the hidden standards. The networks are fighting back in court, and it looks like the FCC isn't looking very good so far. In court hearings yesterday, the 3-judge panel blasted the FCC on a variety of points, noting that their hidden standards are really no different than censorship -- and, if anything, are worse, because it's just a game of "gotcha." However, even more to the point, the judges questioned why the FCC feels the need to take over the parents' role in policing what children see on TV, noting that it's the parents' responsibility to monitor what their kids watch. Basically, they say that if parents are worried about what kids are watching in their bedrooms, the parents shouldn't allow TVs in kids' bedrooms. In other words, it's the parents' responsibility to protect the children, not the government's. The judges also point out how silly it is to hold a separate standard for broadcast TV (the only thing the FCC really has the authority to regulate), when there's so much more on cable and satellite which the kids are probably watching anyway. While that could just open up the FCC to pushing for greater authority over cable and satellite TV (as some politicians would like), it's worth remembering that the FCC's mandate is only over public airwaves -- not private ones, and any change would face tremendous resistance. While the case is still ongoing, it certainly looks like the court took a pretty hostile view to the FCC's usual reasons for fining broadcasters over indecency.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thank God!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's appaling that people have nothing better to do than watch TV in the first place, but complaining about what they watch, willingly, is even worse.
Turn off the TV. Problem solved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So suppose a girl has no license but gets pregnant anyhow; do we lock her up, force her to abort....???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
freedom of speech anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can't we have BOTH?
Everyone thinks the role of society is to facilitate everyone's right to do whatever they want... in fact, that would be chaos. Societie's role is to create a standard that everyone rises to.
I think the the US populace SHOULD create guidelines limiting what we can see.. and not a watered down "lowest common denominator" but something that actually reflects our values.
I'm prpbably gonna get blasted for this view..but that's what I honestly feel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
hopefully this trend will continue and parents will take a more active role in there children's lives
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Can't we have BOTH?
this does not really work, Howard sterns fan base was made of 2 groups, 1) that listened because they liked him and 2) the listened because they disliked him but wanted to know how far he would push it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
Let me rephrase that so I can agree with you: I think the the US populace SHOULD create guidelines limiting what we can see over public airwaves.
...something that actually reflects our values...
My values are probably not the same as your values.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
I think this is where we would run into trouble. Who is "our" in this sentence? This is an extremely diverse country. Coming up with one set of values based on what the poplace decides would be next to impossible. IMHO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
Thanks to our capitalistic society, TV will never get out of control. If a network airs something that is extremely offensive to people, then advertisers will threaten to pull their money because they don't want their products to be associated with something that pisses people off. The system has it's own set of checks and balances and doesn't need an organization looking over it's shoulder.
And think of what we'll be missing out on if people are too afraid to share their art or vision with the world because some organization will fine them. Put it out there and let the people decide if they like it or not!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
There are many governments around the world that limit what their citizens can see. Kim Jong Il does it in North Korea, the Ayatollah does it in Iran, and China does it very well on the Internet.
As soon as you say that you want limits on speech and what people can watch on TV it is a very fast slippery slope down to the likes of the people above.
With Freedom comes Excess. If you want to truly be free you can not impose limits on speech.
Also, the US already has established values with regard to this topic. It is call the First Amendment. It is intended not to protect the majority of society but the minority, who oppose the government and want to protest without fear of being imprisoned because of their ideas. (Of course this means that people like the KKK and Nazi's are allowed to speak their minds, but it helps to ensure that the best ideas rise to the top and are not crushed by government.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
No! I'm single and have no children so don't tell me what is good for the children, I DON'T CARE. It's up to the parents to raise their offspring not government, or people that choose not to have children. If something offends me I turn the channel. Parents should learn to do the same, or use the V-Chip, but don't put the burden of raising YOUR children on the rest of society.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can't we have BOTH?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A - F'in - men!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Watched on CSPAN
BTW, apparently you can say Fu** on CSPAN because the context is completely different than Fox, so the FCC won't fine CSPAN for one of the judge's remarks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Watched on CSPAN
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Personally I think the FCC is pretty much full of crap, but I do want something to help me as a parent to be able to find a program that the whole family can watch. Ratings are good, that comes from the FCC. I say the fines are when they violate the rating that the Network gave the program. i.e. the F-bomb cant accidentally happen for a show that's for 'all viewers'
I'm all for channels that are not censored, but there needs to be something to HELP the parent. Parenting is tough enough...a little help is nice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Fuck the FCC and the holier-than-thou censorship groups.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Problem: Solution
Looks like you have found a workable solution...
The bottom line is that the networks will do whatever brings in the viewers and the advertising dollars. They don't care if they annoy you as long as you keep watching. When people start switching off in drives they will start worrying about their "strategy" - not morality, as they are largely amoral.
I don't have kids to worry about offending, but I don't care much for gratuitous swearing or blasphemy, and I will not tolerate that kind of language in my living room. Swear at me and I will change the channel.
Having said that, since I got a TiVo, this has largely ceased to be a problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
My guess is that if the concept of censorship at the government level was removed we would see a rise in technology and services that will repair this situation.
Part of why it does not work this way is that the time and money that would be spent on such things is being wasted trying to censor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The FCC can police PBS all it wants. but leave primetime fox alone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
politics of the thing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: politics of the thing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Government Censorship
If we control what can be broadcast to 'our' standards, I hate TV sports shows, soap operas, and reality shows, so lets get rid of those! (Like someone else asked, who's standards??)
This reminds me of when Dimension (Cox) Cable had the Playboy channel as a premium, and due to customer complaints about the content quit carrying it. If the customer was watching the content, they either were ordering and paying for it or they had hacked their box to receive all the premiums. The company should have just investigated the complaining customers instead!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government Censorship
My solution: I blocked the whole channel. Call it what you will, but I'd imagine there are others that do the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even though this is a horrible way to say something that is actually true (the neo-con perspective and values), it's true.
Too many people out there are too worried about what everyone else is doing and saying, instead of taking care of themselves. You can NOT control what others do, and every attempt in history to do so, has inevitably failed, even when the oppressed were brutally tortured.
Free will and the power to exercise free will is one of the inherent rights of all men and women on this planet. And free will will always trump censorship and totalitarianism in the end.
As cliche as it is, if you don't like it, change the channel or turn it off. Parenting is the parents responsibility, not the governments.
You are not allowed to tell me what I can and can't watch, or what I do and don't allow my children to watch. In fact, your rights to tell me what to do in any aspect or facet of my life are non-existent, unless I am causing physical harm to you.
The pendulum swings from one extreme to the other, as history shows. Hopefully we are beginning to wake up from the extreme we've been at under the Bush Administration and begin to inch back to the moderate center. As we inch back into the center, I believe that we will hear less about these trivial things and more about important matters, like Global Warming, Genocide, stem cell research, etc.
God help us all if we don't get back to the center. Remember, extremism breeds extremism, no matter who "starts" it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am not a parent.
Again, I'm not a parent-- maybe it's something you learn in the delivery room... I'm not trying to offend or anything, I really don't get it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well
Besides that, no one likes negativity, and that's all cursing really is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well
However, in dealing with my first question, I find your answer lacking, sadly, due to no fault of your own, but only because I highly doubt the FCC and their soccer-mom legion are worried THAT much about my immune system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well
Yeah, I don't like negativity either! ;-)
Actually, one might wonder, why war, police, and crime shows so popular if people dislike negativity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FBOMB
Try being a parent, everyone seems to think it's a walk in the park and all things that your child does relates to bad parenting. I say...think about your past. Think about what you did when your parents wern't looking...are you blaming your parents?
As far as the FCC thing, there is a line that has to be drawn somewhere. Did you break a law when filming it? then don't show it. (i.e. Snuff videos, rapes, etc.) None of that ever should be played on the airwaves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FBOMB
Try being a parent, everyone seems to think it's a walk in the park and all things that your child does relates to bad parenting. I say...think about your past. Think about what you did when your parents wern't looking...are you blaming your parents?
As far as the FCC thing, there is a line that has to be drawn somewhere. Did you break a law when filming it? then don't show it. (i.e. Snuff videos, rapes, etc.) None of that ever should be played on the airwaves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Family" groups?
What kind of people sit around counting dirty words and pretending shock at the sight of a female breast? They are sick, twisted, authoritarian busybodies whose religion teaches them to worry more about my morality than about their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
arn't shows rated?
now if the FCC wanted to issue a fine when a show has content that is not noted, then great. it should, and it should be a HUGE fine.
but i think we all know the real problem is, PARENTS. well bad parents that is. you know the kind, the ones that use TV as a baby sitter, the ones that have a TV in their kids bedrooms(right next to the computer most likely). Next time the FCC wants to fine a TV show for "innaproprate" content, they should also fine Jane "i'm 13 and dressed like a slut" Doe's parents for letting her out of the house looking like an Abercrombie model.
I am all about a license to be a parent. (as for teen pregnecy, no forced aboritions, they can either get a license or give up the kid.)
There is nothing worse for the future of this country then poorly raised kids.
just my $.02
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More info
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free our freedom!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TV is on its way out.
They had followed a formula of programming to sell ads.
A cash machine.
Look at the future market - kids growing up.
Their tv useage is way down in favour of a more interractive medium - communicating on the intenet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ..hard to lunge for the TV
I'm a parent as well. My views most likely differ greatly from yours on attempting to shelter my son from something rather than teach him what it is and how to deal with it but even if that weren't the case, don't be so lazy.
There's a fairly reliable rating system in place, use it. When that's not the case, watch it first without your child, or just don't watch it at all.
The bottom line is that my choices should not be limited to make life more convenient for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yay
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't make me live my life according to your beliefs & I won't make you life your according to mine...You probably wouldn't like mine anymore than I like yours.
It's your responsibility to raise your children, not mine, nor is it the governments.
If you're afraid that something will harm your child...Keep them in a cage in the basement where they belong! And please, please if you must take them out in public...leash & muzzle them like the animals they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
offensive things we obvioiusly must ban
what's that you say? some of these things don't' offend you? i'm offended, that's enough for me.
let's face it, nearly everything, if not everything, is offensive to someone somewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Family Groups Use Children As An Excuse
Now I have nothing against Christians either. But I wish that the Family Research Council and the American Family Association would just come clean about their real agenda.
Ever read "A Handmaid's Tale?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]