DOCSLIB.ORG

The Big Chill? Congress and the FCC Crack Down on Indecency KATHERINE A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Big Chill? Congress and the FCC Crack Down on Indecency KATHERINE A Comm Lawy v22#1 spr2004 6/22/04 3:07 PM Page 1 The Big Chill? Congress and the FCC Crack Down on Indecency KATHERINE A. FALLOW The infamous 2004 Super Bowl Although the FCC has been given rela- Super Bowl Fallout half-time incident—in which Justin tively wide latitude to censor broadcast The Janet Jackson incident provided a Timberlake ripped open Janet Jackson’s programming, the U.S. Supreme Court well-timed boost to the FCC’s ongoing bustier and briefly exposed her right has invalidated parallel government attempts to enforce indecency regula- breast to the millions of viewers watch- attempts to regulate indecency on cable tions more stringently. A week before ing the CBS broadcast—triggered an television and the Internet. The history of the Super Bowl, the FCC issued a Notice election-year political frenzy to “clean the FCC’s indecency enforcement, of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture up the airwaves.” Calling the half-time notable for its vague standards and incon- (NAL) against Clear Channel broadcast a “classless, crass, deplorable sistent outcomes, underscores why the Communications, Inc., proposing to fine stunt,” Federal Communications courts should be concerned about allow- the broadcaster $755,000 for airing inde- Commission (FCC) Chairman Michael ing the government to police program cent material on the Bubba the Love K. Powell vowed to begin a “thorough content on the airwaves. Sponge show.4 This fine, which was the and swift” investigation.1 Television and The FCC’s historical record on largest single penalty for indecency in radio executives summoned before con- indecency is troublesome enough. In the FCC’s history, followed an October gressional panels were grilled on what a radical departure from its previous 2, 2003, NAL in which the FCC pro- steps they would take to make the air- indecency framework, however, the posed fining Infinity Broadcasting waves more suitable for family viewing. FCC in March 2004 issued a ruling that Operations, Inc., some $357,000 for the Congress hastened to act on legislation demonstrates its willingness to restrict broadcast of an Opie & Anthony radio to toughen the FCC’s enforcement of its program content even further. Reversing show featuring a contest that awarded broadcast indecency rules, which prohib- an earlier decision of its Enforcement points for engaging in sexual activity in it the airing of indecent, obscene, or pro- Bureau, the FCC held that NBC violat- public places—one of which included St. fane material between 6 A.M. and 10 P.M. ed the indecency rules when it broadcast Patrick’s Cathedral in New York.5 On On March 11, 2004, by a vote of live the 2003 Golden Globe Awards pro- March 12, 2004, the FCC released an 391-22, the House passed its version of gram, during which the singer Bono said NAL in the amount of $247,500 against the Broadcast Indecency Act of 2004, “fucking brilliant” while accepting his Clear Channel for its broadcast of the which would increase the maximum award. Although it declined to fine Elliott in the Morning show.6 Other than statutory penalty for an indecency vio- NBC in light of the break from FCC the $1.7 million paid by Infinity in 1995 lation from $27,500 to $500,000 and precedent, the Commission held that to settle numerous indecency complaints authorize the FCC to begin license rev- Bono’s statements constituted actionable related to Howard Stern’s show,7 these ocation proceedings against broadcast- indecency and profanity. recent fines represent far and away the ers with three or more indecency fines.2 Apparently abandoning its previous largest forfeitures the FCC has ever A similar bill pending before the Senate contextual approach to indecency, the sought for airing material found to be would authorize the FCC to consider FCC held that the use of any variant of indecent. extending its indecency rules to program- the objectionable word would essential- The FCC has made clear that these ming judged to be gratuitously violent.3 ly be considered indecent and profane recent large fines are part of a concerted The proposed legislation would increase per se and suggested a bright-line rule effort to increase the deterrent effect of its the scope of the FCC’s enforcement would be applied to other expletives. A indecency rules on broadcasters. Several power by, among other things, authoriz- wide range of media groups have Commissioners have explicitly stated that ing the Commission to fine individual attacked the FCC’s decision, which is the FCC’s previous enforcement regime speakers as well as broadcast licensees. vulnerable on numerous fronts under the lacked any teeth and that radio and televi- Politicians and regulators have been First Amendment. sion broadcasters treated the fines as a nearly unanimous in their clamor for The obvious result of the FCC’s new “cost of doing business.”8 As part of its stronger indecency enforcement. Politics approach to enforcement, and recent effort to add muscle to its existing aside, the notion that the federal govern- of Congress’s consideration of tough statutory authority, the FCC announced ment can regulate the content of what is legislation increasing indecency penal- plans to impose forfeiture penalties for said on television and radio is widely ties by orders of magnitude, is to chill each individual indecent utterance instead accepted as a legal given. But such a con- speech. Indeed, this effect could be felt of one fine per program.9 The pending tent-based speech regime is an anomaly immediately after the Super Bowl when Senate bill would give the FCC explicit in First Amendment jurisprudence. several radio and television networks statutory authority for such an approach.10 cancelled certain programming and The FCC has also warned that repeat Katherine A. Fallow (kfallow@jenner. implemented time-delay devices in an offenders will endanger their licenses if com) is a partner in the Washington, effort to protect themselves against violations continue.11 Individual D.C., office of Jenner & Block LLP. potential indecency violations. Commissioners have also advocated Number 1 • Volume 22 • Spring 2004 • American Bar Association • Communications Lawyer • 1 “The Big Chill? Congress and the FCC Crack Down on Indecency” by Katherine A. Fallow, published in Communications Lawyer, Volume 22, No.1, Spring 2004 © 2004 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced by permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. Comm Lawy v22#1 spr2004 6/22/04 3:07 PM Page 25 greater consideration of a broadcaster’s any twenty-four-hour period.18 did not violate the FCC’s indecency record on indecency during license Both bills direct the FCC to consider rules.25 In so holding, the Enforcement renewal decisions.12 Increasingly, the full specific factors in assessing fines for Bureau relied on previous FCC decisions Commission has ignored its own obscene, indecent, or profane utterances, holding that “fleeting and isolated” pro- Enforcement Bureau and undertaken including whether the material was live fane remarks did not rise to the level of review of high-profile indecency cases in or scripted; whether the violator had time actionable indecency.26 an effort to add further gravitas to the to review the recorded or scripted materi- Politicians, however, seized upon FCC’s anti-indecency campaign. al, or in the case of live or unscripted pro- the decision’s statement that Bono used The Commissioners are essentially gramming, whether the violator had a the word “as an adjective or expletive united on the issue of a stricter reasonable basis to believe that it would to emphasize an exclamation”27 as an indecency enforcement regime. Those contain obscene, indecent, or profane example of bureaucratic reasoning gone who have disagreed with the FCC’s recent material; whether a time-delay mecha- awry. Both Houses of Congress quickly indecency rulings have done so usually on nism was used; and whether the material passed resolutions urging the full the grounds that they believed the penal- was broadcast during programming Commission to reverse the Bureau’s ties were not stiff enough.13 Shortly after directed at, or reasonably expected to order, and a bill was introduced in the the Super Bowl, all five Commissioners include, children.19 House proposing to amend 18 U.S.C. testified at hearings before the House and In an obvious response to the Super § 1464 to proscribe eight specific pro- Senate in support of the Broadcast Bowl incident, the proposed legislation fanities in all their forms, “including Decency Enforcement Act of 2004.14 contemplates that fines would increase in verb, adjective, gerund, participle, and Chairman Powell has been especially proportion to the size of the audience or infinitive forms.”28 20 vocal, touting the recent large fines market served. The bills also authorize During the recent congressional hear- imposed on Clear Channel and Infinity the FCC to fine individual artists and ings, several Commissioners vowed to and promising to maintain an aggressive speakers in addition to licensees for will- overturn the Bureau’s decision, making 15 ful or intentional obscene, indecent, or good on their promise when the FCC stance toward broadcast indecency. He 21 also highlighted a recent ruling imposing profane utterances. The proposed legis- released an opinion and order on March the maximum statutory
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The FCC's Recent Enforcement of Obscenity Laws
    Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 15 Volume XV Number 4 Volume XV Book 4 Article 3 2005 PANEL III: Indecent Exposure? The FCC's Recent Enforcement of Obscenity Laws William Davenport Federal Communications Commission Jeffrey Hoeh NBC C. Edwin Baker University of Pennsylvania Law School Paul J. McGeady Morality in Media, Inc. Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation William Davenport, Jeffrey Hoeh, C. Edwin Baker, and Paul J. McGeady, PANEL III: Indecent Exposure? The FCC's Recent Enforcement of Obscenity Laws, 15 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1087 (2005). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj/vol15/iss4/3 This Transcript is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PANEL 3 11/21/2005 1:10 PM PANEL III: Indecent Exposure? The FCC’s Recent Enforcement of Obscenity Laws Moderator: Abner Greene∗ Panelists: William Davenport† Jeffrey Hoeh‡ C. Edwin Baker§ Paul J. McGeady|| John Fiorini, III# MR. SPARKLER: Good afternoon and welcome back to our final panel, “Indecent Exposure? The FCC’s Recent Enforcement of Obscenity Laws.” Before we get started, I wanted to thank the staff and Editorial Board of the Journal for making this year’s Symposium such a success.
    [Show full text]
  • The Aftermath of the Porn Rock Wars
    Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 7 Number 2 Article 1 3-1-1987 Radio-Active Fallout and an Uneasy Truce - The Aftermath of the Porn Rock Wars Jonathan Michael Roldan Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jonathan Michael Roldan, Radio-Active Fallout and an Uneasy Truce - The Aftermath of the Porn Rock Wars, 7 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 217 (1987). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol7/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RADIO-ACTIVE FALLOUT AND AN UNEASY TRUCE-THE AFTERMATH OF THE PORN ROCK WARS Jonathan Michael Roldan * "Temperatures rise inside my sugar walls." - Sheena Easton from the song "Sugar Walls."' "Tight action, rear traction so hot you blow me away... I want a piece of your action." - M6tley Criie from the album Shout at the Devil.2 "I'm a fairly with-it person, but this stuff is curling my hair." - Tipper Gore, parent.3 "Fundamentalist frogwash." - Frank Zappa, musician.4 I. OVERTURE TO CONFLICT It began as an innocent listening of Prince's award-winning album, "Purple Rain,"5 and climaxed with heated testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce in September 1985.6 In the interim the phrase "cleaning up the air" took on new dimensions as one group of parents * B.A., Journalism/Political Science, Cal.
    [Show full text]
  • See What's on ¶O – Lelo This Week, This Hour, This Second
    FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 28 - JUNE 3, 2017 THE GREAT INDEX TO FUN DINING • ARTS • MUSIC • NIGHTLIFE Look for it every Friday in the HIGHLIGHTS THIS WEEK on Fox. Jamie Foxx hosts this new game show, which TODAY TUESDAY features Shazam, the world’s most popular song identi- The Leftovers World of Dance fication app. HBO 6:00 p.m. KHNL 9:00 p.m. FRIDAY Kevin (Justin Theroux) assumes an alternate identity Extraordinary dancers from all ages and walks of life Shark Tank when he embarks on a mission of mercy in a new epi- kick off the qualifier round for the chance to win a life- sode of “The Leftovers,” airing today on HBO. altering $1-million prize in the premiere of “World of KITV 7:00 p.m. The post-apocalyptic drama follows a family of survi- Dance,” airing Tuesday on NBC. Jenna Dewan Tatum vors a few years after the mysterious simultaneous dis- serves as mentor and host, while Jennifer Lopez, Business moguls decide whether or not to invest appearance of 140 million people. Derek Hough and Ne-Yo serve as judges. their own money in new products and companies in back-to-back episodes of the critically acclaimed reali- ty TV series “Shark Tank,” airing Friday on ABC. MONDAY WEDNESDAY Hopeful entrepreneurs pitch their ideas in the hopes of Lucifer The F Word snagging a deal with a Shark. KHON 8:00 p.m. KHON 8:00 p.m. SATURDAY Charlotte (Tricia Helfer) acciden- Celebrity chef and TV personality Gordon Ram- To Tell the Truth tally charbroils a man to death say hosts as foodie families and friends compete in self-defence, and Lucifer in high-stakes cook-offs in “The F Word,” pre- KITV 7:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Clear Channel and the Public Airwaves Dorothy Kidd University of San Francisco, [email protected]
    The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Media Studies College of Arts and Sciences 2005 Clear Channel and the Public Airwaves Dorothy Kidd University of San Francisco, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.usfca.edu/ms Part of the Critical and Cultural Studies Commons, and the Mass Communication Commons Recommended Citation Kidd, D. (2005). Clear channel and the public airwaves. In E. Cohen (Ed.), News incorporated (pp. 267-285). New York: Prometheus Books. Copyright © 2005 by Elliot D. Cohen. This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Arts and Sciences at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Media Studies by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 13 CLEAR CHANNEL AND THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES DOROTHY KIDD UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO With research assistance from Francisco McGee and Danielle Fairbairn Department of Media Studies, University of San Francisco DOROTHY KIDD, a professor of media studies at the University of San Francisco, has worked extensively in community radio and television. In 2002 Project Censored voted her article "Legal Project to Challenge Media Monopoly " No. 1 on its Top 25 Censored News Stories list. Pub­ lishing widely in the area of community media, her research has focused on the emerging media democracy movement. INTRODUCTION or a company with close ties to the Bush family, and a Wal-mart-like F approach to culture, Clear Channel Communications has provided a surprising boost to the latest wave of a US media democratization movement.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of Talk Radio and Its Impact on Politics and Public Policy
    Mount Rushmore: The Rise of Talk Radio and Its Impact on Politics and Public Policy Brian Asher Rosenwald Wynnewood, PA Master of Arts, University of Virginia, 2009 Bachelor of Arts, University of Pennsylvania, 2006 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Virginia August, 2015 !1 © Copyright 2015 by Brian Asher Rosenwald All Rights Reserved August 2015 !2 Acknowledgements I am deeply indebted to the many people without whom this project would not have been possible. First, a huge thank you to the more than two hundred and twenty five people from the radio and political worlds who graciously took time from their busy schedules to answer my questions. Some of them put up with repeated follow ups and nagging emails as I tried to develop an understanding of the business and its political implications. They allowed me to keep most things on the record, and provided me with an understanding that simply would not have been possible without their participation. When I began this project, I never imagined that I would interview anywhere near this many people, but now, almost five years later, I cannot imagine the project without the information gleaned from these invaluable interviews. I have been fortunate enough to receive fellowships from the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and the Corcoran Department of History at the University of Virginia, which made it far easier to complete this dissertation. I am grateful to be a part of the Fox family, both because of the great work that the program does, but also because of the terrific people who work at Fox.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Change: Identity Management and the Boundaries of Acceptable Verbal Conduct in School Settings
    LANGUAGE CHANGE: IDENTITY MANAGEMENT AND THE BOUNDARIES OF ACCEPTABLE VERBAL CONDUCT IN SCHOOL SETTINGS Lynn Downes BA primAry educAtion, BA pre-primary education, BTTC, Master of EducAtion, Inclusive EducAtion, QUT, Master of EducAtion, TESOL, QUT. CELTA, UQ Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Margaret Kettle Associate Supervisor: Professor Gordon Tait Associate Supervisor: Dr Peter O’Brien Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Office of Education Research Faculty of Education Queensland University of Technology May 2019. This page has been intentionally left blank “Fuck is a sacred word?” you ask. Fucking A right it is. It is a word that one should not utter because it is such a terrible word of epic proportions, a word whose mere utterance is a sin. A fucking sin, can you imagine? That’s how fucking important fuck is. And because it’s a sin, using it is so enticing to the young that when they hear it for the first time they are spellbound. And when they use it for the first time, that F and the U bang so deliciously against the hard K, ripping through the lips, it’s as if a caged animal has been unleashed. They feel that they have taken that first mighty step toward adulthood. Some of them may even repeat it over and over, testing to see if God will strike them down for saying it. It’s a word you don’t use in polite conversation or in front of your parents, which makes it even more glorious when chewed up and spit out in the schoolyard or in the bowels of the basement.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissident Knowledge in Higher Education
    Advance Praise for Dissident Knowledge in Higher Education “The space for dissent and real democratic debate is quickly shrinking both in public life and academic institutions in western democracies. Today, the cries of ‘fake news’ make the loudest (though rarely the best informed) voices the site of authority and truth. This volume helps readers in higher education ask critical and conscious questions about what it means to con- tend for truth. It is an important and significant read for those who want the intellectual space to remain a terrain for thinkers.” —Gloria Ladson-Billings, author of The Dreamkeepers “This deep and layered book maps the path toward a university based on eth- ics and justice rather than corporate needs and military standards. It reaches anyone who wants to understand the social, political, and economic trends that define our times. It is an outstanding contribution to the scholarship on higher education.” —William Ayers, author of Teaching with Conscience in an Imperfect World “Dissident Knowledge in Higher Education is a rich and multi-layered examina- tion of the impact of corporatization on our universities, as well as how they can be reclaimed. Highly recommended.” —James Turk, editor of Academic Freedom in Conflict dissident knowledge in higher education edited with an introduction by marc spooner & James MCNinch © 2018 University of Regina Press “An Interview with Noam Chomsky” © 2016 Noam Chomsky, Marc Spooner, and James McNinch This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommerical- NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. See www.creativecommons.org. The text may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes, provided that credit is given to the original author.
    [Show full text]
  • KEEPING IT LEGAL a Guide for WV Broadcasters
    KEEPING IT LEGAL A Guide for WV Broadcasters Published by: COLORADO INDIANA KENTUCKY OHIO PENNSYLVANIA WASHINGTON, D.C. WEST VIRGINIA This is an advertsiement. www.jacksonkelly.com TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS i INTRODUCTION 1 ADVERTISING 3 ADVERTISING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES 3 What was the effect of Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island? .......................................................3 ADVERTISING OF LOTTERIES 5 What is a lottery? 5 How can the “lottery” designation be avoided? .......................................................................6 Is there an exception for charitable lotteries? ...........................................................................7 Are “snow ads” acceptable forms of advertising? ....................................................................7 Can you advertise lottery games which have been made legal by West Virginia state statute? ..................................................................................................................................................7 ADVERTISING OF TOBACCO 9 May television or radio stations advertise stores that specialize in the sale of tobacco products?...................................................................................................................................9 What may television and radio stations advertise? .................................................................10 What about advertisements for vaping? .................................................................................10 ADVERTISING MEDICAL
    [Show full text]
  • The Threat of Conditioned Federal Funds for Indecent Programming on Public Broadcasting Rocio De Lourdes Cordoba
    Hastings Law Journal Volume 42 | Issue 2 Article 5 1-1991 To Air or not to Err: The Threat of Conditioned Federal Funds for Indecent Programming on Public Broadcasting Rocio de Lourdes Cordoba Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Rocio de Lourdes Cordoba, To Air or not to Err: The Threat of Conditioned Federal Funds for Indecent Programming on Public Broadcasting, 42 Hastings L.J. 635 (1991). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol42/iss2/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To Air or Not to Err: The Threat of Conditioned Federal Funds for Indecent Programming on Public Broadcasting by Rocio.DE LOURDES CORDOBA* "The court jester who mocks the King must choose his words with great care.' Recent events have reinforced the truth of this maxim within the realm of the federal government's funding of the expression of ideas. While the funding activities of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) have received a great deal of attention, broadcasting also has become the target of legislation that highlights the federal govern- ment's morality campaign. The late 1980s appear to signal the apex of a forceful, yet iron- ically silent, campaign to remove indecency from the airwaves at any time, and in any shape or form.
    [Show full text]
  • SELECTIVE HEARING: a CHALLENGE to the FCC's INDECENCY POLICY
    NYLS Journal of Human Rights Volume 12 Issue 2 Article 5 Spring 1995 SELECTIVE HEARING: A CHALLENGE TO THE FCC's INDECENCY POLICY Tara Phelan Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/journal_of_human_rights Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Phelan, Tara (1995) "SELECTIVE HEARING: A CHALLENGE TO THE FCC's INDECENCY POLICY," NYLS Journal of Human Rights: Vol. 12 : Iss. 2 , Article 5. Available at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/journal_of_human_rights/vol12/iss2/5 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in NYLS Journal of Human Rights by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@NYLS. SELECTIVE HEARING: A CHALLENGE TO THE FCC'S INDECENCY POLICY Forfive hundred years a struggle was fought, and in a few countries won, for the right of the people to speak and print freely, unlicensed, uncensored, and uncontrolled. But new technologies of electronic communication may now relegate old and freed media... to a corner of the public forum. Electronic modes of communication that enjoy lesser rights are moving to center stage. And so, as speech increasingly flows over those electronic media, the five-century growth of an unabridgedright of citizens to speak without controls may be endangered.' I. Introduction Freedom of speech and of the press, the touchstones of American democracy, have evolved hand in hand with the printed word.2 But in the communications revolution now afoot, print is being replaced as the most valuable information resource.' No longer do Americans turn only to the pages of the leading papers to receive news and opinions on important social topics; radio and television have become vital elements of today's media.4 The promises of 'ITHIEL DE SOLA POOL, TECHNOLOGIES OF FREEDOM 1 (1983).
    [Show full text]
  • Dirty Discourse Sex and Indecency in Broadcasting
    Dirty Discourse Sex and Indecency in Broadcasting Second edition Robert L. Hilliard and Michael C. Keith Dirty Discourse Dirty Discourse Sex and Indecency in Broadcasting Second edition Robert L. Hilliard and Michael C. Keith © 2007 by Robert L. Hilliard and Michael C. Keith BLACKWELL PUBLISHING 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK 550 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia The right of Robert L. Hilliard and Michael C. Keith to be identified as the Authors of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. First published 2003 by Iowa State University Press Second edition published 2007 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1 2007 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hilliard, Robert L., 1925– Dirty discourse : sex and indecency in broadcasting / Robert L. Hilliard and Michael C. Keith.–2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-1-4051-5053-8 (pbk. : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1-4051-5053-X (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Sex on radio–United States. I. Keith, Michael C., 1945– II. Title. PN1991.8.S44H55 2006 791.44′6538–dc22 2006006919 A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. Set in 10.5 on 12.5 pt Dante by SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd, Hong Kong Printed and bound in Singapore by COS Printers Pte Ltd The publisher’s policy is to use permanent paper from mills that operate a sustainable forestry policy, and which has been manufactured from pulp processed using acid-free and elementary chlorine-free practices.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School Donald P
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Donald P. Bellisario College of Communications BROADCASTING, THE FCC, AND PROGRAMMING REGULATION: A NEW DIRECTION IN INDECENCY ENFORCEMENT A Dissertation in Mass Communications by David J. Weinert Ó 2018 David J. Weinert Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2018 The dissertation of David J. Weinert was reviewed and approved* by the following: Robert D. Richards John and Ann Curley Distinguished Professor of First Amendment Studies Dissertation Advisor and Chair of Committee Robert M. Frieden Pioneer Chair and Professor of Telecommunications and Law Matthew S. Jackson Head, Department of Telecommunications and Associate Professor Thomas M. Place Professor of Law, The Dickinson School of Law at Penn State Matthew P. McAllister Chair of Graduate Programs and Professor *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School ABSTRACT The U.S. Supreme Court, in June 2012, left broadcasters in a “holding pattern” by dodging the longstanding question of whether the Federal Communications Commission’s broadcast indecency policy can survive constitutional scrutiny today given the vastly changed media landscape. The high court’s narrow ruling in FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. exonerated broadcasters for the specific on-air improprieties that brought the case to its attention, but did little to resolve the larger and more salient issue of whether such content regulations have become archaic. As a result, the Commission continues to police the broadcast airwaves, recently sanctioning a Roanoke, Virginia television station $325,000 for alleged broadcast indecency. This dissertation yields an in-depth analysis and synthesis of the legal obstacles the FCC will encounter in attempting to establish any revamped policy governing broadcast indecency.
    [Show full text]