Posted on 02/16/2005 1:41:10 PM PST by Dan from Michigan
House Approves Stiffer Indecency Fines
2 minutes ago Politics - U. S. Congress
By GENARO C. ARMAS, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Chafing over racy broadcasts like Janet Jackson's infamous "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl, the House overwhelmingly passed a bill Wednesday authorizing unprecedented fines for indecency.
Rejecting criticism the penalties will stifle free speech and homogenize radio and TV broadcasts, bill supporters said stiff fines were needed to give deep-pocketed broadcasters more incentive to clean up their programs and to help assure parents that their children won't be exposed to inappropriate material.
The measure, which passed 389-38, boosts the maximum fine from $32,500 to $500,000 for a company and from $11,000 to $500,000 for an individual entertainer.
The bill enjoyed broad bipartisan support from lawmakers upset about incidents like Jackson's breast-baring "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show.
"This is a penalty that makes broadcasters sit up and take notice," said Rep. Joe Barton (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee that sent the bill to the full House. "This legislation makes great strides in making it safe for families to come back into their living room."
The White House, in a statement, said it strongly supports the legislation that "will make broadcast television and radio more suitable for family viewing."
The Senate is considering a similar bill. Any differences in the two will have to be worked out before it goes to President Bush (news - web sites) for a signature. Last year the two chambers were unable to reach a compromise.
Opponents said they were concerned stiffer fines by the Federal Communications Commission (news - web sites) would lead to more self-censorship by broadcasters and entertainers unclear about the definition of "indecent."
They cited the example of several ABC affiliates that last year did not air the World War II drama "Saving Private Ryan" because of worries that violence and profanity would lead to fines, even though the movie already had aired on network TV.
"We would put Big Brother in charge of deciding what is art and what is free speech," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., who opposed the bill. "We would see self- and actual-censorship rise to new and undesirable heights."
Parents — not the government — are the best judges of what their children should see and hear, said Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif.
"No one knows when one person's creative work will become another person's definition of a violation of indecency," Waxman said.
The FCC (news - web sites) has stepped up enforcement of the indecency statute, perhaps most notably with a $550,000 fine against CBS for Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction." Radio personality Howard Stern also has been a frequent target.
Fines for indecent programming exceeded $7.7 million last year. Four years ago, FCC fines totaled just $48,000.
The FCC has wide latitude to impose fines. It can fine an individual company, groups of stations owned by a company and individual entertainers. In the case of CBS, it imposed a fine of $27,500 against each of 20 stations owned by the network.
All five members of the FCC — three Republicans and two Democrats — favor greatly increasing the fines.
The House bill allows the FCC to fine an individual entertainer, such as a disc jockey, without first issuing a warning, which is the case now. The FCC has never before issued such a fine.
"By significantly increasing fines, they are going to be at a level where they can no longer be ignored," said Rep. Fred Upton (news, bio, voting record), R-Mich., who introduced the bill. "Parents can rest easy."
Under FCC rules and federal law, radio stations and over-the-air television channels cannot air obscene material at any time, and cannot air indecent material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. The FCC defines obscene material as describing sexual conduct "in a patently offensive way" and lacking "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value." Indecent material is not as offensive but still contains references to sex or excretions.
The House bill gives affiliates protection from fines in instances in which they carry network programming that later is deemed indecent. It also requires the FCC to hold a license revocation hearing after a third offense by a broadcaster, and to respond to an indecency complaint from a viewer or listener within six months.
The Senate bill calls for raising the maximum fine on broadcasters to $325,000, with a cap of $3 million for one day. The House bill does not include a cap.
We've had a whole year and a whole another Super Bowl, and people are STILL talking about Janet Jackson's breast. Sheesh.
The exposed breast incident is probably the most overblown incident in history, more than Abu Ghraib, Paris Hilton, Judas Jeffords' party switch, Desperate Housewives, and the O.J. Simpson trial combined.
Hopefully the Repubs aren't hijacked yet despite Democrat claims. But if it does happen say goodbye to being the majority party. Americans won't accept theocracy.
"Let's go over to Stewart's house and burn something".......huh=huhhuhuhuh
"Parents — not the government — are the best judges of what their children should see and hear, said Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif."
I agree. But I don't remember a warning on last year's Superbowl that said "parental content advised- A 40 year old tittie will appear at half time"
I think that behavior is what this bill is after.
The mainstream media news will have to be cited every day.
I bet you only think you control it. Commercials are practically X rated these days and they pop up very unexpectedly. They even show up on the morning kiddie shows.
I do control it. There's the clicker and if it gets real bad for my tastes - the off button.
Nothing gets passed the off button.
Stern said this morning that the minute this is signed into law, he starts playing music and says nothing more than the name of the song, the time of day, and the weather until his contract with Infiniti runs out.
It`s amazing how an exposed mipple for a split second can cause so much outrage, but a President who raped a woman, pardoned 17 FALN terrorists who bombed NYC and Chicago 130 times so his wife could buy votes, pardoned the biggest tax cheat in US history, and buried a non vet in Arlington cemetary for cash is completely brushed under the rug. Yes ladies and Gentleman, the exposed female nipple is so much more shocking. Too bad they couldn`t have exposed 8 years of the Clintonism during that half time.
True, nor do I see such warnings on National Geographic programj. If people or their Reps voted that titties would never ever be shown I could accept it - I don't think the rules are that specific and that is the concern.
I've yet to see any commercials on the PBS kids channel that my children watch. What do you let your kids watch?
But it's too late. She'd already been mooned.
Is my TV the only one that still has a power button and the ability to change the channel?
Did the rest of the TV's in this country get converted into Max Headroom style sets you can not turn off?
I don't know if I am for this or not. I do know, from having been around a while and from having watched old TV shows, that is is possible to have well-acted, compelling dramas and funny comedies without resorting to profanity, bare backsides, and stupid innuendo every other line. The state of the "art" that we see on television has not improved with time.
What the PTC has one their website @ http://www.parentstv.org/ptc/action/withoutatrace/content.htm
EXAMPLES:
" high school sex scandal leads to murder. During the course of the investigation, investigators question the victim’s friend, Amber. The investigators tell Amber that Jen was raped. Amber is surprised, and explains that there was a party the day of the rape. As she describes the party, flashback scenes are shown depicting teenaged boys and girls participating in what can only be described as an orgy, including:"
They then continue to explain, in graphic detail, exactly what is wrong with that TV show and why it should be fined. Then even include a 2-3 minute video of the bad parts so you can get offened too.
This page has no parental controls on it and any child with a computer can access it. Why don't they practice what they preach?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.