Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

Fox Network Declines to Air Amateur Porn Mom Episode of New Animated Show (UPDATED)

Paul Detrick | 8.28.2013 4:31 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

UPDATE 8/29/2013 3:30pm: The original title of this post ("FCC Bans Amateur Porn Mom Episode of New Animated Fox Show") citing the blog Splitsider was incorrect: The FCC doesn't ban content on broadcast televison or radio but rather fines networks and stations after material is aired and is deemed actionable. While the fear of FCC fines may have played a factor in the episode not airing, the FCC itself doesn't ban anything. That is up to various networks' standards and practices departments, which regulate content for a wide variety of reasons, including audience and advertiser expectations, aesthetics, and potential legal action.

[This update continues near the bottom of the post]

Splitsider reported that the Aug. 24 episode of High School USA, part of Fox's new animated block of programming called Animation Domination High Definition (ADHD), was banned by the Federal Communications Commission.

Creator, Dino Stamatopoulos, announced the news via Facebook saying, "FCC won't let us air this week's High School USA! this week. Pretty great."

"Best Friends Forever" was the title of the often heartfelt episode that featured a storyline about a teenage daughter upset that her mother had become an amateur adult film star "without telling her all the perverted details." The episode is available via Hulu with the disclaimer: "Intended only for mature audiences. Viewer discretion advised."

ADHD's programming premiered online with animated shorts and a website full of GIF images and social media friendly content; Then it began airing in its regular slot on television July 27. Even before it aired though, the Parent's Television Council (PTC), which says it promotes family-friendly programming, was calling the animated shows, "horrifically graphic, ultra-violent, sexually explicit, and profanity-laden." A press release from PTC, July 23:

Fox would have us believe that such extremely explicit programming is intended only for adult audiences. Yet they must know the content is inherently attractive to children with animated formats and themes like 'High School USA!' and 'Scientifically Accurate Spider Man.'

While Parent's Television Council may have gotten their wish granted by FCC regulators when an episode got pulled, the state of content consumption today shows how outdated FCC regulations and groups like the Parent's Television Council have become. Fox Broadcasting put it a little more diplomatically in its public comment to the FCC in June of this year:

Not only does broadcasting represent just a small sliver of the panoply of video content available to an average consumer today, it is also less uniquely pervasive and accessible to children than it was 30+ years ago.

Further, someone could watch a show deemed "indecent" by the FCC on broadcast television simultaneously as they watch it on a phone, tablet or computer, over which the FCC has no content-regulation power. Because of this dichotomy Fox said it was being held to a different standard:

The steady advances in video technology, and corresponding shifts in consumer viewing habits, have eradicated any justification that may once have existed for subjecting broadcasters to less First Amendment protection than other media.

Reason TV spoke with one of the writers for ADHD in July, Heather Anne Campbell, who writes many of the animated shorts that appear at FoxADHD.com.

[UPDATE 8/29/2013, CONT.]

After the post, I followed up with creator Dino Stamatopoulos via Facebook and asked whether Fox's standards and practices department said that the episode would not pass FCC guidelines or if the FCC stepped in, to which he replied, "From what I understand it was FCC."

The FCC's media department declined comment as of today.

The episode in question, "Best Friends Forever," was available on Hulu and Amazon Instant Streaming, but appears not to be available on either site now. It is available on torrent sites like this one though.

In the 2012 Supreme Court case Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, the court ruled that the FCC didn't give Fox Broadcasting, who would have faced fines, enough notice of their new policy on idecency. From the NYTimes:

It left open the question of whether changes in the media landscape have undermined the rationales for limiting their free-speech rights in ways the First Amendment would not tolerate in other settings. Cable television and the Internet are not subject to government regulation of ostensibly indecent material.

The court stopped short, as it did in 2009 with the same case, from looking at the First Amendment issues rasied.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Planned Tax Hikes Kill High-End Swiss Real Estate Market

Paul Detrick is a former video reporter and senior producer at Reason.

Civil LibertiesCultureScience & TechnologyFamily IssuesFCCComedyFree Speech
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (23)

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.

  1. Corning   12 years ago

    The episode is available via Hulu with the disclaimer: "Intended only for mature audiences. Viewer discretion advised."

    Maybe the FCC's plan is to eliminate all broadcast programing.

  2. Brian   12 years ago

    The steady advances in video technology, and corresponding shifts in consumer viewing habits, have eradicated any justification that may once have existed for subjecting broadcasters to less First Amendment protection than other media.

    Shut your fucking mouth, Fox. When politicians read stuff like this, all they think is, "Hey, why are we giving so much First Amendment protection to other media?"

    1. Ruckus   12 years ago

      My thoughts as well.

      Fox needs to take shut up and take one for the team here.

      1. Pathogen   12 years ago

        Or... Or... Maybe the FCC should just shut the fuck up, and fade into obscurity, while civilization manages to move on... without them. Yeah, bullshit... that will never happen.

        1. Anonymous Coward   12 years ago

          But who will rule over broadcast spectrum without the FCC? You don't actually expect the peasants to form solutions on their own! That would be chaos! Anarchy! SOMALIA!

  3. John Thacker   12 years ago

    Between this and FOX (and CBS's) dispute with Aero and others, really, how long until the broadcasters do decide to go cable-only?

    1. MP   12 years ago

      And then be held hostage by Time Warner? No way. You'd have to see more vertical integration first, i.e. Comcast/NBC.

      1. John Thacker   12 years ago

        Well, cable and satellite and online.

        The broadcasters hate Aereo in one sense, but CBS was actually recommending that people use them during their TW dispute.

  4. Rufus J. Firefly   12 years ago

    Meanwhile, Miley can simulate fucking and fingering on live TV.

    1. SIV   12 years ago

      Cable TV

      1. robc   12 years ago

        So if FOX shuts down their over-the-air broadcasts and leaves out 2% of the population that makes it okay?

        1. John Thacker   12 years ago

          According to current law, yes.

    2. Apatheist ?_??   12 years ago

      That was cable.

  5. Harvard   12 years ago

    Damn. We're going to be deprived of Dino Stamatopoulos' conception of "art". The poorer we are.

  6. Paul.   12 years ago

    Creator, Dino Stamatopoulos, announced the news via Facebook saying, "FCC won't let us air this week's High School USA! this week. Pretty great."

    Oh you thought that... ha... how quaint.

    It says "Congress shall make no law...", not "Unelected career bureaucrats shall make no law..."

    Lot of the young people make that mistake.

    1. LarryA   12 years ago

      I'd say his point was "We can still show it over the internet, with a boatload of publicity because it got banned."

  7. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    They should replace it with a half hour animated biography of Mohammed.

    1. Paul.   12 years ago

      That's all we need, another attack on the Libyan embassy because of our First Amendmentz.

    2. Corning   12 years ago

      I am still wondering how PBS got away with this:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.....e_of_Faith

      The first episode deals with the life of Muhammad

      Then again it was broadcast before 9/11.

      Has anyone asked Obama and Hilary if they think this show caused the 9/11 attacks?

  8. Eduard van Haalen   12 years ago

    Reason is consistent in the sense they'd defend the right of the Oakland People's etc. etc. Collective to run a program about righteous socialists lynching the Koch brothers.

    But I don't think they'd do a fawning interview with the President (or Chief Commissar) of the People's etc. about what a wonderful artistic experience the whole thing is.

  9. Dave Krueger   12 years ago

    Further, someone could watch a show deemed "indecent" by the FCC on broadcast television simultaneously as they watch it on a phone, tablet or computer, where the FCC has no power.

    For now.

  10. Wintermute   12 years ago

    Scrubbed off Hulu.

  11. Dave Krueger   12 years ago

    I thought all moms did amateur porn at some point.

    I think any broadcast programming that is "horrifically graphic, ultra-violent, sexually explicit, and profanity-laden" should have its own rating so we all immediately know what to watch without having to sift through tons of crap to find it.

    Nonetheless, I can understand why the FCC would ban it. After all, the wording of the First Amendment is crystal clear when it guarantees free speech to everyone as long as no one claims to be offended by what they have to say. It's "for the children" and government thinks all citizens are children (although definitely not so young that we can't work and pay taxes).

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Can We End Racism by Ending the Idea of Race Itself?

Rachel Ferguson | From the June 2025 issue

The Supreme Court Said States Can't Discriminate in Alcohol Sales. They're Doing It Anyway.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 5.24.2025 7:00 AM

Cocaine Hippos, Monkey Copyrights, and a Horse Named Justice: The Debate Over Animal Personhood

C.J. Ciaramella | From the June 2025 issue

Harvard's Best Protection Is To Get Off the Federal Teat

Autumn Billings | 5.23.2025 6:16 PM

Trump's Mass Cancellation of Student Visas Illustrates the Lawlessness of His Immigration Crackdown

Jacob Sullum | 5.23.2025 5:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!