[BC] Indecency bill

[Harold Hallikainen]

> ------ At 10:56 AM 6/9/2006, Bailey, Scott wrote: -------
>
>>I not for listening to programs of vulgar language, but the FCC,
>>Congress, and George Bush's administration have absolutely no right to
>>sensor paid services on cable and satellite.
>
> Many of us here have experienced the FCC's conviction that they have
> the right to do anything they choose. Mainly because no one has the
> testicular fortitude to challenge them in court. So far it's far
> cheaper to pay the fines than litigate, regardless of how sincerely
> you believe you're in the right. We have enough years of a
> religiously driven government left to see purity legislated. There
> are enough groups with "family" in their names to force the issue.
>
> Rich

I don't think the Communications Act distinguishes between a paid or free
service. Satellite and CATV both use radio spectrum (CATV through the CARS
service and satellite distribution of programming). I think the
justification used to put tighter restrictions on broadcast is that people
pay to receive nonbroadcast programming, so if they don't want to hear/see
it, they just don't have to pay for it. It SEEMS that, as far as TV goes,
the V-chip should have put television on an equal footing with paid
services since viewers can program their television to reject programming
based on the V-chip code. Perhaps a similar rating system could be
implemented on radio using RDS or IBOC datastreams.

In any case, "indecent" programming on broadcast is permitted during the
"safe harbor" of 10pm to 6am when it is assumed few children are
listening. Obscene programming is not permitted at any time (and, I
believe, is also not permitted on CATV).

Harold


-- 
FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising
opportunities available!