[Dan from Michigan]

The FCC wasn't created for regulating programming content. It happened to do that later on. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing the FCC should have control over, is regulating what frequencies different brodcasters have. Radio stations have certain frequencies. TV has other ones. Etc. That is their job, and should be their only job.

It's like the BATF. They regulate guns. They were originally a TAX collection group. Prohibition ended, and they became overrun with JBT's.

This is the problem with government problems. Also, what is indecent? Peter Deutsch would consider Free Republic indecent. That's another problem with regulating content.

There are two, and only two legit censoring tools I support and respect. One is the clicker. The other is writing networks, affiliates, and boycotting advertisers of the goods that sponsor shows. That's how us gunowners put a dent into Mitch Albom, and really hurt K-MART. The MARKET system.

Those that run to government are as bad as the liberals since it plays right into their hands. They love nothing more than power in the hands of government.

[Under the Radar]

DFM, I will reply to you when I can. Good post.

[Under the Radar]

The FCC wasn't created for regulating programming content. It happened to do that later on. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing the FCC should have control over, is regulating what frequencies different broadcasters have. Radio stations have certain frequencies. TV has other ones. Etc. That is their job, and should be their only job.

DFM, this is a well-reasoned approach, but one I do disagree with to a certain extent. I think you and I agree that control of content should be done on more of a local level rather than a federal level. If there were a way to do that, I would be all for it. Anything that dismantles the Federal behemoth in favor of local government is a good thing. However, where I part ways with libertarians is this: not all "government" control is bad. Our form of government, a representative republic, ideally allows majority mores to control while protecting minority interests. You ask how decency is defined? It is defined by the prevailing community standards, a tautology I know, but a useful one. And communities must have a fundamental right to set standards for behavior within themselves, otherwise they are not communities, by definition.

The issue becomes whether it is possible for individual localities to set these standards, or whether it is more expedient and useful to have a national regulatory agency do it. I won’t pretend to understand the scientific or technological nuances of regulating something like broadcasting frequencies. I suspect that a national agency is the only thing that could work, but I may be wrong. Certainly there have been no incentives offered to develop any alternative, unfortunately.