The federal appeals court in New York on Monday tossed out a key FCC indecency ruling that said a slip of the tongue gets broadcasters a fine for indecency, telling the commission that it failed to give a good reason for its decision and couldn’t likely find a good reason if it had to.
“We find the FCC’s new policy sanctioning ‘fleeting expletives’ is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedures Act for failing to articulate a reasoned basis for its change in policy,” the court wrote in a 2-1 opinion.
Although a majority of the judges found little to like about the commission’s 2006 decision, it sent the order back to Washington, allowing the panel to get another stab at writing the rules.
But even the court’s remand came with a catch as it warned the FCC to ensure that “further proceedings” are “consistent” with the court’s decision.
“We are doubtful that by merely proffering a reasoned analysis for its new approach to indecency and profanity, the commission can adequately respond to the constitutional and statutory challenges raised by the networks,” Judge Rosemary Pooler wrote. “Nevertheless, because we can decide this case on this narrow ground, we vacate and remand so that the commission can set forth an analysis. While we fully expect the networks to raise the same arguments they have raised to this court if the commission does nothing more on remand than provide additional explanation for its departure from prior precedent, we can go not further than this opinion.”
[Continue reading about the indecency ruling]
As a father I hate to say that I’m glad that the FCC got its hand slapped. But I think its time that the FCC sat down and seriously re-thought how it judges programs. Both what it rates as indecent and also how it comes by ratings for the shows. At the same time I agree that once they get the ratings understandable, and reasonable. They should continue enforcing them… and hopefully with some common sense.
Tags: Interesting, Legal, Television
June 5th, 2007 at 11:45 am
You raise some good points in your post. Here are some facts that you might find interesting. An overwhelming majority of Americans (91%) object to government deciding what they are able to watch on television. When activists talk about protecting children instead of parents—here’s what they’re talking about: sixty-eight percent of the country’s 110 million television-viewing households do not include children under age 18 and households with children have different challenges to face due to the varying ages of kids within each family. Currently, there are 11 million households with children age 6-11, 15 million households with children age 0-5 and 9 million households with children 12-17.
TV has come a long way from the days of three channels and rabbit ears antennas. Today’s TV audiences are putting to use broadband, DVRs, TV video on demand, iPods and cell phones to greatly expand their choices about what, when, where and how to watch TV. New technology means consumers have more selection than ever and more control than ever over what they see on TV. We all have more choices and parents have more tools to ensure their kids only see what’s right for them. Let’s let parents decide—not government, for all of us.
There is more information to be found at http://www.TelevisionWatch.org
June 5th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Good information. Plus with the increase in channels, we’ve now got the ability to have channel’s that focus on adult programming. And because of the FCC regulations, we’ll have to subscribe to networks like HBO just for the ability to have some, somewhat uncensored television. But even that has been censored somewhat.
Look also what happened when XM bowed to non-existent FCC warnings about some talk show hosts. They are a paid, supposedly uncensored network. Yet they suspended the hosts…. and thousands canceled their XM radio subscriptions. People are getting fed up with broadcasts that are censored needlessly.