The U.S. Supreme Court gives OK to government crackdown on the airwaves.

[Polynikes]

WASHINGTON — DEVELOPING: The U.S. Supreme Court gives the tentative OK to a government crackdown on indecency on the airwaves.

But the court, in a 5-4 decision Tuesday, is refusing to pass judgment on whether the Federal Communications Commission's "fleeting expletives" policy is in line with First Amendment guarantees of free speech.

The justices say a federal appeals court should weigh the constitutionality of the policy.

The decision throws out a ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.

The appeals court had found in favor of a FOX Television-led challenge to the policy and had returned the case to the FCC to let the agency provide a "reasoned analysis" for its tougher line on indecency.

The commission appealed to the Supreme Court instead.

FOXNews.com - Supreme Court: FCC Can Monitor Every Curse Word on Live TV - US Supreme Court | Cases | Justices



This certainly isn't the beginning but none the less could prove as a tipping point down the slippery slope. What's interesting is what indecency will be defined as.

There was little doubt that this was going to come surface once a Democratic majority was in place in Congress.

Campaign Aide Tapped to Head FCC


President Obama said yesterday that he will nominate Julius Genachowski, a technology adviser during the presidential campaign and law school friend, to head the Federal Communications Commission.

Obama Names Campaign Adviser to Head FCC - washingtonpost.com

This could get ugly and scary. Estimates on how long until a similar attempt is really materialized against the internet?

 

[rathi]

Its technically impossible to censor the internet to avoid porn or other "objectionable material". Its part of what makes the internet such a threat to people who like to control everything.

 

[Orion]

The internet isn't airwaves though... but everything else is.

Looks like censorship will be increased.

 

[winston53660]

Ah **** this god damn ****ing sucks.

 

[Ikari]

The FCC should be all but abolished. It's only power to police airwave piracy and nothing more.

I hate the ****ing Federal Communist Commission.

 

[Cold Highway]

Just another reason why the FCC is a violation of the First Amendment.

 

[Harshaw]

The Court decided on no First Amendment issue here, and specifically remanded that question back to the lower court. This was a regulatory decision only.

 

[Kandahar]

Seriously...what purpose does the FCC serve? Anyone?

If there were no laws at all governing what could appear on television, what's the worst that could happen? I doubt Nickelodeon would start showing hardcore pornography just because it was legal.

 

[Ikari]

Seriously...what purpose does the FCC serve? Anyone?

It's a manner by which the government controls the content of what we are allowed to see and hear from the TV. A form of censorship over the rights of the individual and nothing more. The FCC should be used for property management and that's it; not government action against free speech.

 

[TheNextEra]

Well conservatives have to protect the public from those obscene 0.4 sec tit shots from Janet Jackson.

 

[winston53660]

Well conservatives have to protect the public from those obscene 0.4 sec tit shots from Janet Jackson.

Tipper Gore I bet would support this action.

 

[Ikari]

Well conservatives have to protect the public from those obscene 0.4 sec tit shots from Janet Jackson.

I think both sides are equally at fault. Not many people would regulate the FCC into the position it should be. Most everyone in government is there to proliferate their own power and make sure their friends are taken care of.

 

[Triad]

If I understand correctly its trying to crackdown on the intentional and more and more common practice of beeping like the first 3 letters in a swear word on public* airwaves.

I don't have much problem with that since there are plenty of private avenues if you wish to listen to people swearing constantly.



Now if its being used by some as an outlet to go after "right wing talk radio"(aka as the successful talk radio)as part of that political effort being pushed by those who favor the people who couldn't gain similar audiences. Than that is a problem.

 

[obvious Child]

The FCC should be all but abolished. It's only power to police airwave piracy and nothing more.

I hate the ****ing Federal Communist Commission.

Not to mention that it acts on complaints sent by a few rather than the many. A couple groups like Focus on the Family have been caught send thousands of letters from a few people to the FCC to get their way.

According to a new FCC estimate obtained by Mediaweek, nearly all indecency complaints in 2003—99.8 percent—were filed by the Parents Television Council, an activist group.

99.8% Of FCC Indecency Complaints Filed By Parents Television Council : Diggers Realm

An organization that is that incompetent to act on what is essentially spam from a few people when no one else said anything needs to either be restructured from top to bottom or eliminated.

 

[TheNextEra]

If I understand correctly its trying to crackdown on the intentional and more and more common practice of beeping like the first 3 letters in a swear word on public* airwaves.

I don't have much problem with that since there are plenty of private avenues if you wish to listen to people swearing constantly.



Now if its being used by some as an outlet to go after "right wing talk radio"(aka as the successful talk radio)as part of that political effort being pushed by those who favor the people who couldn't gain similar audiences. Than that is a problem.

So you're ok with government censorship, just as long as it is censorship YOU agree with it?

 

[GottaHurt]

More stupid regulations. The solution is simple, don't tune in or don't turn your TV on.

The networks have a rating system in place, you can decide what you want or don't want to watch based on the ratings.

 

[Dr_Patrick]

This is yet another situation where the government tries to play mommy and daddy instead of letting parents take responsibility for their own children. I wonder if Obama's Administration will fight or at least speak out against this crap. I certainly wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[Truth Detector]

Well conservatives have to protect the public from those obscene 0.4 sec tit shots from Janet Jackson.

Yes indeed, the FCC is a Conservative organization; typical of the nonsensical bile you love to spew all over the forum.

To all the other Libertarians and whacked out Liberals on the forum; the FCC regulates the airwaves and licenses radio and TV broadcast transmissions to maintain order.

Imagine what it would be like if you have NO regulations; pirate programs would interfere with regular programming and the resulting mess and conflicts of airwaves would represent anarchy.

They also regulate communication channels critical for air traffic, emergency channels and ocean navigation.

If you want your porn and cuss words, no one is stopping you; that is why there are satellite programs and cable. The public airwaves are no place for that.

I suggest that you inform yourselves what it is that is provided before you all go on your typical anti-Government/Anti-Conservative rants.

About the Federal Communications Commission

 

[Dr_Patrick]

Yes indeed, the FCC is a Conservative organization; typical of the nonsensical bile you love to spew all over the forum.

To all the other Libertarians and whacked out Liberals on the forum; the FCC regulates the airwaves and licenses radio and TV broadcast transmissions to maintain order.

Imagine what it would be like if you have NO regulations; pirate programs would interfere with regular programming and the resulting mess and conflicts of airwaves would represent anarchy.

They also regulate communication channels critical for air traffic, emergency channels and ocean navigation.

If you want your porn and cuss words, no one is stopping you; that is why there are satellite programs and cable. The public airwaves are no place for that.

I suggest that you inform yourselves what it is that is provided before you all go on your typical anti-Government/Anti-Conservative rants.

About the Federal Communications Commission

I don't think uncensored television and radio would result in anarchy. That's kind of an absurd assertion. What leads you to believe that it would result in that?

 

[Truth Detector]

I don't think uncensored television and radio would result in anarchy. That's kind of an absurd assertion. What leads you to believe that it would result in that?

I wasn't talking about uncensored television and radio, I was talking about the reasons the FCC exists and how it has to regulate the airwaves.

Do you have any comprehension how sound waves are transmitted?

They require one to broadcast at a specified frequency; that would be the little tuner on your radio set.

If no one regulated who can use that frequency, the airwaves would be filled with nothing much better than interference.

Perhaps you should do a google search on broadcast transmissions and how they get transmitted through the air.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_broadcasting]Radio broadcasting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

But on the issue of PUBLIC airwaves, yes they most certainly do require censoring to protect minors who can tune into the programs. You see, it is not just about what YOU think, it happens to be PUBLIC and many in the PUBLIC find foul language and porn to be offensive.

If you don't, that is fine and dandy, but last time I looked, the FCC didn't come to dclxvinoise and say they were going to gear their regulations to satisfy your personal tatses.

Carry on.

 

[Dr_Patrick]

I wasn't talking about uncensored television and radio, I was talking about the reasons the FCC exists and how it has to regulate the airwaves.

Do you have any comprehension how sound waves are transmitted?

They require one to broadcast at a specified frequency; that would be the little tuner on your radio set.

If no one regulated who can use that frequency, the airwaves would be filled with nothing much better than interference.

Perhaps you should do a google search on broadcast transmissions and how they get transmitted through the air.

Radio broadcasting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I was referring mainly to censorship, but okay. I can certainly understand the purposes of that.

But on the issue of PUBLIC airwaves, yes they most certainly do require censoring to protect minors who can tune into the programs. You see, it is not just about what YOU think, it happens to be PUBLIC and many in the PUBLIC find foul language and porn to be offensive.

And parents are incapable of doing this? It should be their responsibility to parent their children and not the responsibility of the Federal Government.

If you don't, that is fine and dandy, but last time I looked, the FCC didn't come to dclxvinoise and say they were going to gear their regulations to satisfy your personal tatses.

It's not just my personal taste. I think you'd be surprised by the number of people who think that the censorship done by the FCC is completely idiotic and pointless.

Carry on.

My wayward son. Good song.

 

[Kandahar]

But on the issue of PUBLIC airwaves, yes they most certainly do require censoring to protect minors who can tune into the programs. You see, it is not just about what YOU think, it happens to be PUBLIC and many in the PUBLIC find foul language and porn to be offensive.

Do you think Nickelodeon would start dropping F-bombs and showing porn just because it was legal? Of course not. Television channels are profit-motivated just like other businesses, and they aren't going to needlessly offend their viewers. On the other hand, a network like Comedy Central might be more willing to push the envelope if it were legal, because that's what their viewers want. And that's fine. If you don't like it, don't watch Comedy Central. How hard is that?

 

[Truth Detector]

Do you think Nickelodeon would start dropping F-bombs and showing porn just because it was legal? Of course not. Television channels are profit-motivated just like other businesses, and they aren't going to needlessly offend their viewers. On the other hand, a network like Comedy Central might be more willing to push the envelope if it were legal, because that's what their viewers want. And that's fine. If you don't like it, don't watch Comedy Central. How hard is that?

So you believe that someone who is 8 or even 10 years old can make the determination of what they are watching and it's content?

How hard is it for you to comprehend that the PUBLIC airwaves are intended to be kept to a neutral content without vulgar language, sex or porn because they are PUBLIC and for those who want vulgar content, they can get that on cable or satellite channels.

Can you guarantee every parent in the United States that their children will not tune into "adult" material if it is permitted to be broadcast on the public airwaves? NO; and neither can the FCC, therefore it is regulated.

How difficult a concept is this for people like you? :roll:

 

[Ikari]

Yes indeed, the FCC is a Conservative organization; typical of the nonsensical bile you love to spew all over the forum.

To all the other Libertarians and whacked out Liberals on the forum; the FCC regulates the airwaves and licenses radio and TV broadcast transmissions to maintain order.

Imagine what it would be like if you have NO regulations; pirate programs would interfere with regular programming and the resulting mess and conflicts of airwaves would represent anarchy.

They also regulate communication channels critical for air traffic, emergency channels and ocean navigation.

If you want your porn and cuss words, no one is stopping you; that is why there are satellite programs and cable. The public airwaves are no place for that.

I suggest that you inform yourselves what it is that is provided before you all go on your typical anti-Government/Anti-Conservative rants.

About the Federal Communications Commission

As I said, the only job of the FCC should be to enforce property rights, not censor. It's not public airwaves. Just because you can get a piece of metal of proper length and pick up electro-magnetic radiation and have a device which can interpret that radiation and compose a series of fast moving pictures and sounds out of it does not make it public. You do not pay for the use of that frequency. You can not just set up a radio station or tv station and broadcast at your whim. The use of that specific E&M spectrum is cut off to you, you may only receive a signal, you may not broadcast on in that frequency bandwidth yourself. Someone else, a private person, has paid for the rights to use that frequency and power. Thus it belongs to them, it's private.

It's the same damned thing with the smoking ban. People call the private business public so they can make excuses as to why government has a proper role sticking its nose in where it don't belong. Conservative...liberal...neither respect property. You define it which ever way you want to get what you want. No smoking, "decency" on TV...whatever BS you can make up. Follow the money, who pays is the owner. If it's public, the public pays for it and the public can use it. If it's private, a private individual pays for it and can deny use of it at their leisure. Both are true for private business and TV/Radio. You can't go to a radio station and demand to have a program, they choose to let you speak and broadcast those words. Business owners can kick you out, they don't have to let you use the kitchen or make your own drink.

No matter how you cut it, if you wish to acknowledge reality, you see that the "public" airwaves happen to be private. Just because you have a device that can pick up certain signals doesn't mean that what you have found is public. You only wish to define it as such so that you can excuse censorship against the People.

 

[Ikari]

So you believe that someone who is 8 or even 10 years old can make the determination of what they are watching and it's content?

How is that my problem? I don't care what you let your kids watch or how ****ty a parent you are so that you can't control what they watch. You want to use lousy parenting as excuse to infringe on the rights of the individual? That's ****ed up.

How hard is it for you to comprehend that the PUBLIC airwaves are intended to be kept to a neutral content without vulgar language, sex or porn because they are PUBLIC and for those who want vulgar content, they can get that on cable or satellite channels.

How hard is it for you to comprehend that it is not public? Do you pay to use a frequency? Can you broadcast? No? Didn't think so, because the use of that frequency and power is not yours. That belongs to a company which bought the rights to it. You can merely purchase a device which can pick up and interpret the radiation and display a signal. Tax payer money doesn't support FOX or ABC to broadcast over the air. The companies bought that ability, it's theirs. Case closed.

Can you guarantee every parent in the United States that their children will not tune into "adult" material if it is permitted to be broadcast on the public airwaves? NO; and neither can the FCC, therefore it is regulated.

I can...it's called unplug the TV. Only let it operate when you are around. Be a damned responsible parent instead of trying to social engineer things so you don't have to watch over your kids. "Oh please...won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN"! What piss poor appeal to emotion. It's the oldest false argument on the books. You can't just see the E&M radiation which composes TV and radio signals. You need a device to receive them. Control that device. Jesus Christ, is that too much? You kids can't watch TV if there is no TV.

How difficult a concept is this for people like you? :roll:

I don't know. How difficult is the concept of responsibility to you? Why do you have to have the government solve your problem for you? Baffles me.