Kill off the FCC

[Bfgrn]

I've never had a problem with certain forms of censorship, but I can't figure out how the FCC exists under our Constitution.

It isn't constitutional as it is, it was however not suppose to be able to dictate content. Originally it was just suppose to make certain broadcasts did not infringe on other frequencies and copyrights. Censorship should be the sole choice of the privately owned networks, what they choose to air and what they do not, but parents got lazy and decided that the TV should be the babysitter, so they ignored the constitution and gave the FCC godlike powers over the networks so they wouldn't have to watch their kids. I know, I was raised by the TV, and it sucked.

Hey pea brain, the public airwaves are owned by WHOM?

Pea brain TV...24/7 infomercials...

 

[Nosmo King]

I've never had a problem with certain forms of censorship, but I can't figure out how the FCC exists under our Constitution.

Interstate commerce. A very constitutional mandate. The FCC regulates and permits access to the spectrum of radio waves available. Without the FCC, a virtual monopoly on this resource could be held by folks.

 

[JD_2B]

Who else would control bandwidth so we don't have tv/radio stations stomping all over each other?

Right. Don't kill it off entirely as it does do some good in keeping some order to so many forms of communications.

But, on content? The FCC should butt out.

The whole point is to the content.. If the content of the shows and what not go beyond the freedom of expression, and into (even slightly) commercializing a product or service, then the FCC gets fair play. Thats commerce, and while there is always a freedom of expression, and the FCC does not attempt to regulate that- there is no absolute freedom in any public forum to market something that in any way encourages people to make a purchase.. Yes there is free trade, and this is encouraged- but this is about interstate commerce- and any TV shows, or radio shows that encourage the purchasing of a product or service, that are aired in more than one state, are subjected to the FCC's rules and regulations, as well as all other code and law applicable to interstate and even intrastate commerce.

Since states alone are respectively independent, they can only make laws that affect their particular states. One state may allow a certain kind of advertising while another may not. This is why nationally aired programs fall under a federal jurisdiction, rather than on a state by state basis.

 

[California Girl]

I've never had a problem with certain forms of censorship, but I can't figure out how the FCC exists under our Constitution.

Interstate commerce. A very constitutional mandate. The FCC regulates and permits access to the spectrum of radio waves available. Without the FCC, a virtual monopoly on this resource could be held by folks.

And Mr Lloyd plans to tax talk radio (conveniently mainly right wing) off the air and replace them with 'community' radio.

Fuck that!

Mr Lloyd is a supporter of state controlled media. I'm surprised that, of the media, the only ones to be concerned about this are the right wingers.... but I guess that's because the left would be happy to sacrifice freedom of speech just to silence the dissenting voices on the right.

 

[rightwinger]

I wonder why no one's defending the FCC? Surely there must be someone here who thinks the FCC is needed.

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

 

[Contumacious]

With all the the devices parents can use to keep their kids from seeing bad thing on TV (V-chips, cable filters, parental controls, the god damn off button), is there any reason why we still need the useless pile of trash known as the FCC around? How is this censorship of nudity (and especially swearing) not a blatant breach of the 1st amendment? Why do we need government prescribing what is and isn't appropriate for TV?

UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO THE MAX.

 

[KittenKoder]

I wonder why no one's defending the FCC? Surely there must be someone here who thinks the FCC is needed.

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

I will chalk you up as a technophile ... you can use the fancy toys but have no idea how they work. However that is not what the FCC is doing, even though they are suppose to. What they are doing is:

1. Shilling for companies.
2. Censoring and babysitting Americans.
3. Playing favorites (probably based on bribes).

 

[rightwinger]

I wonder why no one's defending the FCC? Surely there must be someone here who thinks the FCC is needed.

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

I will chalk you up as a technophile ... you can use the fancy toys but have no idea how they work. However that is not what the FCC is doing, even though they are suppose to. What they are doing is:

1. Shilling for companies.
2. Censoring and babysitting Americans.
3. Playing favorites (probably based on bribes).

I'm sorry Kitty
But satellite, radio, television, cell phones, GPS are not fancy toys used by technophiles. They are critical to the economic success of our country.
Without the FCC, all signals would be stepping over eachother. Senders would jack up power to get through further stepping on transmissions.

 

[KittenKoder]

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

I will chalk you up as a technophile ... you can use the fancy toys but have no idea how they work. However that is not what the FCC is doing, even though they are suppose to. What they are doing is:

1. Shilling for companies.
2. Censoring and babysitting Americans.
3. Playing favorites (probably based on bribes).

I'm sorry Kitty
But satellite, radio, television, cell phones, GPS are not fancy toys used by technophiles. They are critical to the economic success of our country.
Without the FCC, all signals would be stepping over eachother. Senders would jack up power to get through further stepping on transmissions.

GPS = Learn to read a fucking map moron.
Cell phones = Toys for people too insecure about themselves.
Radio, Television = Um ... wow ... just wow.

 

[Contumacious]

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

I will chalk you up as a technophile ... you can use the fancy toys but have no idea how they work. However that is not what the FCC is doing, even though they are suppose to. What they are doing is:

1. Shilling for companies.
2. Censoring and babysitting Americans.
3. Playing favorites (probably based on bribes).

I'm sorry Kitty
But satellite, radio, television, cell phones, GPS are not fancy toys used by technophiles. They are critical to the economic success of our country.
Without the FCC, all signals would be stepping over eachother. Senders would jack up power to get through further stepping on transmissions.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. ~ The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


The controls on radio and later on television, unsurprisingly, originated with the crypto-fascist New Deal. Although the Federal Radio Commission was established in 1927, it actually had no control on content, though it immorally claimed a monopoly for the government over the radio spectrum. The FRC was replaced by the more powerful Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1934, as part of the New Deal program to cartelize industries in favor of established, big businesses, in this case ABC and NBC, and raise the costs for smaller competitors. The FCC regulates radio and television broadcasting, including interstate telecommunications by wire, satellite or cable and international communications that originate or end in the United States.

The FCC exerts indirect control over the content of broadcast media through its licensing of broadcasters and its power to fine companies over the highly subjective opinion of what constitutes "offensive" content. Every eight years radio and TV broadcasters must reapply to renew their licenses. This allows the State to apply pressure on the broadcast news media via the corporations that own them. The mere threat of a refusal to renew a license can wipe out the value of a TV news company. Obviously, those executives who manage these news organizations will be very wary of doing anything that could risk the destruction of shareholder wealth, and consequently their own careers. A conspiracy of mutual interests polices the content of the MSM.

.

 

[Father Time]

I wonder why no one's defending the FCC? Surely there must be someone here who thinks the FCC is needed.

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

Ok since I don't know the other functions olf the FCC very well I should've said who will defend the FCC's censoring of media?

 

[JD_2B]

I wonder why no one's defending the FCC? Surely there must be someone here who thinks the FCC is needed.

I will defend the FCC
The FCC is responsible for all spectrum use in the United States. They are one of the most important agencies in government.
Without the FCC allocating spectrum, bandwidth and power levels there would be no cell phones, satellite communications, internet, GPS

Ok since I don't know the other functions olf the FCC very well I should've said who will defend the FCC's censoring of media?

They can only censor media that is involved in interstate commerce.. commercialized media..

They just cannot censor the opinions or "expression"..

The freedom of speech does not extend to obscenity..

 

[Contumacious]

The freedom of speech does not extend to obscenity..

Let me see if I can guess which Founding Father said that........Patrick Henry?............James Madison?..... Thomas Jefferson?..........Jerry Falwell?


Am i close?

 

[JD_2B]

The freedom of speech does not extend to obscenity..

Let me see if I can guess which Founding Father said that........Patrick Henry?............James Madison?..... Thomas Jefferson?..........Jerry Falwell?


Am i close?

It protects freedom of religion, peaceable assembly, and freedom of expression.

Since the states cannot be expected to be burdened with interstate commercial commerce laws, the FCC does it. And yes, they do get to censor even the mildest of expletives..

And no I personally do not care if people use obscenity in public or on TV. I wouldn't give a shit if the president himself tore off during a speech and using foul language in every other sentence. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

Censorship has gotten much more lenient anyways.. I dont know what all the bitching is about, really. They flex with the times, just not as much as some of us do. And I think that is fair- because some people see obscenity as being highly offensive. Some states have a more tolerant attitude and some have a less tolerant attitude. Because of this, they (the FCC) cant be too lax..

 

[Contumacious]

some people see obscenity as being highly offensive. .

ob·scene (b-sn, b-)
adj.
1. Offensive to accepted standards of decency or modesty.
2. Inciting lustful feelings; lewd.

Yet another religious concept is intertwined with civil law and enforced by the theocratic state.

.

 

[KittenKoder]

The freedom of speech does not extend to obscenity..

Let me see if I can guess which Founding Father said that........Patrick Henry?............James Madison?..... Thomas Jefferson?..........Jerry Falwell?


Am i close?

It protects freedom of religion, peaceable assembly, and freedom of expression.

Since the states cannot be expected to be burdened with interstate commercial commerce laws, the FCC does it. And yes, they do get to censor even the mildest of expletives..

And no I personally do not care if people use obscenity in public or on TV. I wouldn't give a shit if the president himself tore off during a speech and using foul language in every other sentence. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

Censorship has gotten much more lenient anyways.. I dont know what all the bitching is about, really. They flex with the times, just not as much as some of us do. And I think that is fair- because some people see obscenity as being highly offensive. Some states have a more tolerant attitude and some have a less tolerant attitude. Because of this, they (the FCC) cant be too lax..

Actually, "swearing" is protected by freedom of speech, what is considered "foul" to one is not to another. The language on American False Gods is far more offensive than ... Penn and Teller's Bullshit, at least P&T know how to use words correctly more often, but they don't bleep the words crap, dang, fudge, etc..

 

[JD_2B]

Let me see if I can guess which Founding Father said that........Patrick Henry?............James Madison?..... Thomas Jefferson?..........Jerry Falwell?


Am i close?

It protects freedom of religion, peaceable assembly, and freedom of expression.

Since the states cannot be expected to be burdened with interstate commercial commerce laws, the FCC does it. And yes, they do get to censor even the mildest of expletives..

And no I personally do not care if people use obscenity in public or on TV. I wouldn't give a shit if the president himself tore off during a speech and using foul language in every other sentence. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

Censorship has gotten much more lenient anyways.. I dont know what all the bitching is about, really. They flex with the times, just not as much as some of us do. And I think that is fair- because some people see obscenity as being highly offensive. Some states have a more tolerant attitude and some have a less tolerant attitude. Because of this, they (the FCC) cant be too lax..

Actually, "swearing" is protected by freedom of speech, what is considered "foul" to one is not to another. The language on American False Gods is far more offensive than ... Penn and Teller's Bullshit, at least P&T know how to use words correctly more often, but they don't bleep the words crap, dang, fudge, etc..

Sure- but not in a public domain. Obscenity in "utterance" in a public domain is completely lacking in redeeming social importance- as long as the obscene swearing is sexual in nature. This is to protect unwilling adults from having to participate in hearing and seeing it, and having sexual thoughts unwillingly. This does not apply to privately owned porn or private speech.. And these "bleeps" only come up in commercial viewing, including shows that might have a commercial nature to them, however slight.

Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49, 65–70 (1973)(commercial showing of obscene films to consenting adults); Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) (private, consensual, homosexual conduct); Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 111 Ct. 2456 (1991) (regulation of non– obscene, nude dancing restricted to adults).

CRS/LII Annotated Constitution First Amendment

 

[KittenKoder]

It protects freedom of religion, peaceable assembly, and freedom of expression.

Since the states cannot be expected to be burdened with interstate commercial commerce laws, the FCC does it. And yes, they do get to censor even the mildest of expletives..

And no I personally do not care if people use obscenity in public or on TV. I wouldn't give a shit if the president himself tore off during a speech and using foul language in every other sentence. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

Censorship has gotten much more lenient anyways.. I dont know what all the bitching is about, really. They flex with the times, just not as much as some of us do. And I think that is fair- because some people see obscenity as being highly offensive. Some states have a more tolerant attitude and some have a less tolerant attitude. Because of this, they (the FCC) cant be too lax..

Actually, "swearing" is protected by freedom of speech, what is considered "foul" to one is not to another. The language on American False Gods is far more offensive than ... Penn and Teller's Bullshit, at least P&T know how to use words correctly more often, but they don't bleep the words crap, dang, fudge, etc..

Sure- but not in a public domain. Obscenity in "utterance" in a public domain is completely lacking in redeeming social importance- as long as the obscene swearing is sexual in nature. This is to protect unwilling adults from having to participate in hearing and seeing it, and having sexual thoughts unwillingly. This does not apply to privately owned porn or private speech.. And these "bleeps" only come up in commercial viewing, including shows that might have a commercial nature to them, however slight.

Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49, 65–70 (1973)(commercial showing of obscene films to consenting adults); Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) (private, consensual, homosexual conduct); Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 111 Ct. 2456 (1991) (regulation of non– obscene, nude dancing restricted to adults).

CRS/LII Annotated Constitution First Amendment

"If we remove everything that offends someone, there would be no television."

 

[Father Time]

"This is to protect unwilling adults from having to participate in hearing and seeing it,"

They can change the channel or turn the TV off (crazy I know).

Oh and the word shit is censored and that word has no sexual connotation (unless you're into coprophilia)

 

[JD_2B]

"This is to protect unwilling adults from having to participate in hearing and seeing it,"

They can change the channel or turn the TV off (crazy I know).

Oh and the word shit is censored and that word has no sexual connotation (unless you're into coprophilia)

"shit" counts because it refers to excretory activities..

It is therefore considered profane, and profanity is not considered to be beneficial to the use of the freedom of speech.

If you read the Supreme Court opinions, it will make more sense to you as to why much profanity is all held as "non protected speech". The profanity- it should be noticed- is not "going poopie" anymore- because we allow our kids to say that now, (unlike 100 years ago, this was not allowed) but "taking a shit" is not something our kids will be allowed to say in a typical American home, so it is not allowed to be broadcast then. Same with "fuck", a sexual word, and words profanely describing vaginas and penises.. etc.. Much of all profanity that is censored by the FCC would also be terms that a person would not want used around their children, or words that a person would use around their girlfriend or boyfriend's parents, even. In many cases, people generally think that profanity is just demeaning to the person uttering it. Censorship is not limited to the FCC, its just that someone has to tell people which profane words are not allowed to be broadcast, etc.

Just give them enough credit that they do try to flex with the language and general tolerance of the times..


FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC.