Fcc Considering A Complaint On The Use Of Redskins Name On Air

[JimH52]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

 

[Stephanie]

well, just wonderful
. the "government" is now deciding what can and can't be said on Tv.
DO you think they will stop here?

we are PAYING for THIS SHIT to stomp on our freedom of speech

when did we become a communist Nation

this country and our freedoms are history you citizens just sit by and say nothing

 

[JimH52]

well, just wonderful
. the "government" is now deciding what can and can't be said on Tv.
folks we are PAYING for THIS SHIT to stomp on our freedom of speech

when did we become a communist Nation

this country and our freedoms are history

Calm down Steph...The Government is not doing anything. They are responding to a petition that they received. Read the link. That is all. I seriously doubt they can make a decision like this, since the name is officially registered with a Federal agency.

 

[Stephanie]

well, just wonderful
. the "government" is now deciding what can and can't be said on Tv.
folks we are PAYING for THIS SHIT to stomp on our freedom of speech

when did we become a communist Nation

this country and our freedoms are history

Calm down Steph...The Government is not doing anything. They are responding to a petition that they received. Read the link. That is all. I seriously doubt they can make a decision like this, since the name is officially registered with a Federal agency.

After watching this administration stomp all over our freedoms and you doubt this?
Well good for you, but I don't have that faith

 

[Pogo]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

 

[mudwhistle]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

They revoked the copyright already.

If I was the Redskins I'd sue their fucking balls off.

 

[martybegan]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

Yeah, you left out the quote from the FCC chairman... Note the bolded part.

"We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. "There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today. And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."[/QUOTE]

 

[Pogo]

And btw the station in question is a small 2000 watt facility in the outer fringes of Washington, northern rural Virginia, so Banzhaf is apparently attempting to beat up on the little guy:

(Red = strong signal; Purple = fair signal; Blue = fringe signal)
​

Know what else is interesting about this map?
You can see that the station's signal doesn't even serve downtown Washington, which is where Banzhaf works at George Washington University. Unless he lives pretty far out to the west, he's not even part of the WWXX audience.

Another tidbit: the broadcaster's business address is on "Redskin Park Drive".

 

[JimH52]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

They revoked the copyright already.

If I was the Redskins I'd sue their fucking balls off.

WOW! I forgot about that. You are right. That is crazy stuff!

Maybe they can just use a symbol and call themselves the NFL team formerly known as the Redskins.

 

[BlackFlag]

WOW! I forgot about that. You are right. That is crazy stuff!

Maybe they can just use a symbol and call themselves the NFL team formerly known as the Redskins.

Wow! Best idea I've heard yet!

 

[Pogo]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

Yeah, you left out the quote from the FCC chairman... Note the bolded part.

"We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. "There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today. And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."[/QUOTE]

That's just placating rhetorical filler. It makes no statement but on the word itself. Whether the same word constitutes a slur when used as an already established team name is a completely different question.

It's beyond absurd to refer to "the Washington football club" especially when it might be playing "the Jets".

Is the New Orleans Saints name offensive to Sinner-Americans?
SMH

 

[martybegan]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

Yeah, you left out the quote from the FCC chairman... Note the bolded part.

"We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. "There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today. And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."[/QUOTE]

That's just placating rhetorical filler. It makes no statement but on the word itself. Whether the same word constitutes a slur when used as an already established team name is a completely different question.

It's beyond absurd to refer to "the Washington football club" especially when it might be playing "the Jets".

Is the New Orleans Saints name offensive to Sinner-Americans?
SMH

its a statement by an FCC chairman that he agrees with the concept of the word being "naughty."

This is something that should have been laughed at, but it is being taken seriously, by a federal agency.

 

[Uncensored2008]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

Fucking Communists.

This is getting old fast.

 

[Pogo]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

Yeah, you left out the quote from the FCC chairman... Note the bolded part.

"We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. "There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today. And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."[/QUOTE]

That's just placating rhetorical filler. It makes no statement but on the word itself. Whether the same word constitutes a slur when used as an already established team name is a completely different question.

It's beyond absurd to refer to "the Washington football club" especially when it might be playing "the Jets".

Is the New Orleans Saints name offensive to Sinner-Americans?
SMH

its a statement by an FCC chairman that he agrees with the concept of the word being "naughty."

This is something that should have been laughed at, but it is being taken seriously, by a federal agency.

The FCC has no domain over "words", so he can only speak on that as a citizen. It has domain over licensing airwaves, and he didn't address that. Nor could he, as it's not how the agency works. There are five Commissioners.

Nor could he "laugh at" a consumer complaint; FCC is obliged to address each complaint "on its merits". Which is what he said. They may laugh at it in private but doing so officially would directly contradict the mission. The agency is required to take each complaint seriously, no matter how frivolous.

 

[martybegan]

FCC considering ban on Redskins nickname punishment for announcers Shutdown Corner - Yahoo Sports

I don't know how they do this, since I am sure it was Copyrighted by a federal agency.

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

Yeah, you left out the quote from the FCC chairman... Note the bolded part.

"We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. "There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today. And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."[/QUOTE]

That's just placating rhetorical filler. It makes no statement but on the word itself. Whether the same word constitutes a slur when used as an already established team name is a completely different question.

It's beyond absurd to refer to "the Washington football club" especially when it might be playing "the Jets".

Is the New Orleans Saints name offensive to Sinner-Americans?
SMH

its a statement by an FCC chairman that he agrees with the concept of the word being "naughty."

This is something that should have been laughed at, but it is being taken seriously, by a federal agency.

The FCC has no domain over "words", so he can only speak on that as a citizen. It has domain over licensing airwaves, and he didn't address that. Nor could he, as it's not how the agency works. There are five Commissioners.

Nor could he "laugh at" a consumer complaint; FCC is obliged to address each complaint "on its merits". Which is what he said. They may laugh at it in private but doing so officially would directly contradict the mission. The agency is required to take each complaint seriously, no matter how frivolous.

So if a radio station allows a string of expletives get out on the air, the FCC can do nothing about it?

So the FCC Chairman comments on every little complaint made?

 

[HUGGY]

I wonder if any of this would be happening if the Redskins were winning?

Maybe what's REALLY going on here is that these Native American folks just don't like being reminded that they are losers.

 

[Pogo]

The article is bullshit. What it means is that somebody filed a complaint. That's how the FCC works -- it handles complaints, it doesn't initiate action on its own. So when they say the "FCC is considering" it, it means they have a complaint and they address it. No shit -- they address all complaints, whether it goes anywhere or not. In other words, "Wednesday".

>> We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. <<​

--- which is exactly the same thing that happens with every other complaint.

FCC didn't take an action; John Banzhaf did. Because he's apparently a busybody who thinks he's gonna decide moral standards for everybody else. But the CNBC writer wanted to catch some eyeballs so he turned the action to the recipient. In effect one dishonesty playing on another.

I'm with Mike Ditka. This fake kerfuffle is "so stupid it's appalling".

Yeah, you left out the quote from the FCC chairman... Note the bolded part.

"We'll be looking at that petition, we will be dealing with that issue on the merits and we'll be responding accordingly," Wheeler said Tuesday. "There are a lot of names and descriptions that were used over time that are inappropriate today. And I think the name that is attributed to the Washington football club is one of those."[/QUOTE]

That's just placating rhetorical filler. It makes no statement but on the word itself. Whether the same word constitutes a slur when used as an already established team name is a completely different question.

It's beyond absurd to refer to "the Washington football club" especially when it might be playing "the Jets".

Is the New Orleans Saints name offensive to Sinner-Americans?
SMH

its a statement by an FCC chairman that he agrees with the concept of the word being "naughty."

This is something that should have been laughed at, but it is being taken seriously, by a federal agency.

The FCC has no domain over "words", so he can only speak on that as a citizen. It has domain over licensing airwaves, and he didn't address that. Nor could he, as it's not how the agency works. There are five Commissioners.

Nor could he "laugh at" a consumer complaint; FCC is obliged to address each complaint "on its merits". Which is what he said. They may laugh at it in private but doing so officially would directly contradict the mission. The agency is required to take each complaint seriously, no matter how frivolous.

So if a radio station allows a string of expletives get out on the air, the FCC can do nothing about it?

So the FCC Chairman comments on every little complaint made?

Usually no. Perhaps he was asked for comment, I don't know. What I read there is typically noncommittal rhetorical fluff.