Today in Broadcast Regulation
Good news on the free speech front:
It's highly likely that you've long since forgotten about a 2003 episode of NYPD Blue that featured a naked woman--in much the same way that it's impossible to determine which eroded rock first led to a civilization-swallowing sinkhole--but the FCC has a long memory for such things, which is why it's been tied up in court pretty much since Dennis Franz was still a thing, trying to enforce a $27,500 penalty it levied against ABC and each of the 45 affiliate sessions who broadcast it.
But today the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan threw out the collective $1.2 million fine, saying it falls under the same decision it reached last July regarding the FCC's fine for "fleeting expletives." According to the ruling, the court sees no distinction between Bono uttering "fucking brilliant" at an awards show and a lingering shot of actress Charlotte Ross' ass, and that the FCC's process of deciding in which contexts such occurrences are permissible is still "unconstitutionally vague." As such, the penalty has been nullified, and once again the FCC is left to try appealing the decision and defend its right to set decency standards.
In another welcome development, President Obama today signed the Local Community Radio Act, thus expanding the number of stations permitted to broadcast on the FM band. It took a drawn-out fight to pass this one, and the bill's supporters had to make some concessions along the way; this analysis from the Prometheus Radio Project is a good summary of what the new law does and does not do.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I never thought about it like that before.
http://www.anon-web-tools.edu.tc
Anon-bot, we know you can do better than that.
I'm with Binky - TRY HARDER. Thanks
Oh, I remember it well. The only thing that came between me and her tits as Sipowitz's kid's ears.
I say this with little exaggeration: The entire FCC is unconstitutionally vague.
The next thing you know, I will be exposed to penises on television. Watching a show and BAM, forced to look at penises. Your right to look at televised penises stops at my eyeballs. PENISES!
You are already exposed to "penises" (the word) on television. Have you no imagination?
Next - Shrieking Vulvas. SHRIEKING. VULVAS.
Next - shrieking vulvas. SHRIEKING VULVAS, I SAY!
I saw Shrieking Vulvas open for The Pixies back in '92.
I was into them before they sold out.
Betty White your date?
It's spelled vuvuzela, not vulva.
This article is informative and interesting
The FCC is a worthless piece of shit that has no place in a free society, and anyone there not working on measuring radio interference in electronics should be immediately fired, out of a cannon, into the sun.
...but other than that, the FCC is OK, right?
I go through all this trouble to build a mag-rail reactionless solar injection cannon and you expect me to sully its beauty by putting FCC regulators in it?
There is no community radio worth a damn unless Doherty is interviewed on Radio Electra at Burning Man this year.
Yep, I'm callin' you out Brian! No pussying out with BMIR either.
Meh. TV is so 20th century, and the ability to find just about anything you can think of on the internet is making it mostly irrelevant anyway.
That's just one of the many reasons it's so important to keep the FCC's dirty hands off our internet. That's the fight for the future, not some chick's butt on yet another crappy police drama.
Forget Charlotte Ross? I don't THINK SO!
Pics or it didn't happen.
It's been so long, I've forgotten what "low power FM" currently refers to. 10w? 100w? 1w?
Low power FM = 100 watts or less.
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/lpfm/index.html
Hard to imagine any urban area where the FM broadcast band isn't already full. LPFM would be more interesting if it had access to TV channels 5 and 6, 76-88MHz.
Is this going to allow as many stations as if they were still granting 10w M licenses? Let alone authorizing true community 1w broadcasting? Or anything between the 0.1w xmtrs they allow but can't penetrate indoors and the old 10w stations?
Interesting that reading programs (talking books, etc.) are given special protection, but other analog subcarrier services not.
What an incredible development! Now people will be able to purchase expensive broadcasting equipment and transmit their own creative material for several miles around, depending on the wattage required.
Or they could just podcast on the internet, and take advantage of a search engine system that will deliver a direct link to anyone seeking their material, anywhere in the world (except some countries).
1. Regulate and stamp out all instances of 'fleeting expletives'.
2. Be vigilant for nipple slips.
3. Regulate the internet with "Net Neutrality".
Anyone know where Comstock is buried? I have an overwhelming urge to go piss on his grave.
-jcr
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-.....GRid=19982
Here's a homeless guy in Columbus, Ohio who should be on the radio.
They made a big deal of his voice, but it's clear that he also has a mind. There are probably plenty of bums that are fairly good mimicks of a voice or two, but this guy also knows what to say and how to say it.
Yep, this kind of mickey mouse, puritanical bullshit is EXACTLY why the FCC should be forbidden (not discouraged, not unfunded, not directed) to have absolutely NOTHING to do, whatsoever, with the internet.
At most, if it were to be retained as a function of government, then ONLY as a repository of technical engineering standards - an 'official' reference source, with NO 'enforcement' authority, whatsoever. Maybe as a sub-office of the bureau of weights and measures, with NO 'political appointees'. Let the market regulate itself. With the amount of choice currently available for content selection (and avoidance), there is absolutely NO justification, whatsoever, for ANY governmental content regulatory or oversight function in an erstwhile free society.
Can we have a screen capture of the offensive scene?
I want to see if i am offended.