Posted on 09/10/2001 10:27:35 AM PDT by Map Kernow
Some of the major television networks have announced that they are going to compete in a race from the gutter to the sewer this fall season. Decency regulations do exist, but three of the main players have already indicated that they intend to violate the rules.
As The New York Times and NewsMax recently reported, G.E.’s NBC is planning to introduce a character that will use the Lord's name in vain, according to Aaron Sorkin, executive producer of “The West Wing.” Such a position has customarily been considered taboo for network TV.
Viacom, Inc.’s CBS stated that its new contribution to American culture would include some generous helpings of crude dialogue, “F” word intact. Other television faire promises to add more unconventional characters and more revealing sex scenes than presented in the past.
Amidst the controversy over content, four major media conglomerates have decided to head to court. What spurs their legal action relates to the recent trend toward the construction of a media oligarchy in America.
In addition to setting decency standards, the FCC controls the size of national broadcasters’ audiences and monitors monopoly implications within market areas. Almost simultaneous with network announcements, Viacom, Inc.'s CBS and G.E.'s NBC argued in federal court that the Federal Communications Commission rules, which limit their audiences to 35 percent of American homes, violate the First Amendment. News Corp.'s Fox joined in with the legal action, echoing the same objections. Not to be left out, AOL Time Warner, Inc. was in court to try to remove a restriction that prohibits ownership of a cable operation and broadcast television station that are located in the same market.
Judicial relief as an outcome in these cases is crucial. Viacom, which also owns UPN, acquired CBS last May. The additional collection of CBS television stations caused its national audience to rise to 41 percent. The FCC ordered Viacom to conform to the audience restriction regulation within one year. News Corp. is in a similar position having acquired Chris-Craft Industries in July, extending its broadcast audience to 41 percent.
The media giants are, in effect, saying ‘let us expand our control’ while at the same time they are allowing their execs to say ‘let us abandon our responsibility.’
Free expression is of inestimable importance to the American system of government and way of life. Limitations that are placed upon speech have typically involved expressions that are not intended to primarily communicate ideas. The classic notion of yelling fire in a crowded theatre, assuming that there is no fire, illustrates this type of expression. Statements that involve slander, fraud, invasion of privacy and infliction of severe emotional distress are further examples of non-protected utterances.
The venue in which the expression is made also comes into play. We recognize that content discussed in a neighborhood tavern may not be suitable to repeat in a kindergarten class.
One such venue that has traditionally been handled differently due to the likely sensitivity of the audience during specified times is the over-the-air broadcast. Federal law prohibits the broadcast of indecent programming over the public, non-cable airwaves. Howard Stern has set records for FCC fines as a result of his program’s violation of decency provisions. If we are to have equal protection under the law, stiff fines must be imposed on the networks that follow through on their pledge to substantially lower the broadcast decency bar.
It is always preferable for our society to avoid government interference, if at all possible, when it comes to the free market. But this presupposes that we have an honorable corporate citizenry. If regulations are already in existence, they should be enforced. If these massive media companies now try to seek special favors through the courts, the public must demand that they clean up their respective acts regardless.
It is only through responsibility and self-regulation that broadcast media can maintain their freedom and, more importantly, their integrity.
He appreciates your support.
Coming from a group in Newsmax that showed no fear putting pictures of Ron Brown's skull on the internet, I'd figure this bunch would stay clear of First Amedment regulation questions.
Give me a break.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic!)
You might want to check out the 7th Commandment (Exodus 20 Verse 7).
It seems obvious that we should use His name in praise or worship, not as a curse or in jest or as some sort of political statement. Anything else is disrespectful, at best.
He appreciates your support.
Funny, I didn't see Joe mentioned in this article, but...you're right: if Joe Lieberman supports something, we have to oppose it.
OK, then, MORE FILTH ON TV!
Satisfied?
"War on Drugs"? Yeah, OK, I get it...
Ever hear of the "broken window" theory of community policing? You let a punk get away with busting a window in a building, on grounds that there are "more important" matters to police, and the building will wind up with every window broken. Giuliani and Bratton implemented a policy in NYC eight years ago of going after "quality of life" infractions (public urination, aggressive panhandling, etc.) that previous administrations hadn't bothered with, and the overall crime rate went down---WAY down.
Just as the streets are policed in our cities, our airwaves are regulated for, among other things, decency. If the regs are not enforced and openly defied, then we will have a spiraling downward and coarsening of our cultural life and our community and home environments. Maybe you find that acceptable. I pray to God there're enough others who don't.
Do you have another cheap shot to post, or is there a substantive rejoinder you can make?
The quality of programming has been going down for years, and as a result, their viewership. They have been under the impression that folks have been going to cable channels in order to see more smut. The network moguls think that if they allow MORE crap on the air that people will watch. This will be funny to watch. I can't wait to see the Neilsen numbers after the loosened standards have been in place for a few months. I believe the moguls will get a very big surprise; just not the one they expect!
And tell your kid to turn it off, too, especially when he/she's home alone, or at a friend's place, etc.
Kids always listen to their libertarian parents. Too bad these networks and their sponsors don't realize that...
"Priorities?"
Get real. _Politics_ touches directly a tiny number of people and, indirectly, a slightly larger number of people.
But these days media reality impacts everyone. Didn't Gale Weathers say "Pop culture is the politics of the 21st century?"
You're living in the 60s, man, with your hash and rebellion (that would be the 1960s for the hash, and the 1760s for the rebellion).
Don't blather about other people having misplaced priorities. At least people who worry about TV are worried about something real which is eating away at civilization on a scale that is worth worrying about.
You and your "problems" are like a guy in prison getting raped worrying about whether the guys raping him are KKKers or Black Panthers. And whether they'll let him toke up afterward.
My priorities are fine. You need to get some fresh air. Mark W.
I apologize, but that is a logical disconnect.
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.