I agree with you in that it is my responsibility to raise my children, not that of the FCC. Thus, I monitor what they watch, the websites they use, etc.

Further on this topic, I involve my kids in my lifestyle. They think that orienteering in the woods at night is quite a bit of fun. They look forward to our monthly trip to the climbing gym (where they do most of the climbing).

In a nutshell, I see the government trying to step in where they don't belong. If parents are doing their job parenting, then the gov't won't see reason to get involved. I believe that too often parents are letting the television become the caretaker so that parents can focus on themselves.

RB

Do TV stations and radio shows have the right to broadcast whatever they want? Should we keep the government out of deciding whats right and wrong to see/listen too? I know I monitor very closely what my children watch on TV and listen to on the radio and feel that is my responsibility.

TV and radio stations do not have the right to broadcast whatever they want over the public airwaves. More power to you for monitoring what your kids watch, but just because parents have a responsibility to keep their kids from watching bad stuff doesn't mean broadcasters have free license to air whatever they want, no matter how obscene or offensive to the community over the community's spectrum.

I also don't know why this is always framed as an issue that only concerns children. I don't want to be subjected to a sadomasochistic display at the Super Bowl halftime show, either, and I'm all grownup.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

My opinion is that the government should be able to censor some things, but it should tread very lightly and err on the side of free expression. If you don't like it, you can always turn the channel or turn it off.... there's always opportunities for more restriction of speech at the "user level", but there's no way for a citizen to "uncensor" anything.

---

_______________________________________________

there's always opportunities for more restriction of speech at the "user level", but there's no way for a citizen to "uncensor" anything.

There's no way for a citizen to "uncensor" anything? Very little is censored at all these days, what with the internet, cable, and satellite. We're not talking about censorship, we're talking about what the government allows its broadcast spectrum to be used for.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I think the balance is about right. The FCC can impose some standards on TV and radio broadcasts. I don't see that as a problem since there is always cable TV, satellite radio, print media and the internet to serve as vehicles for delivering trash. It is hard to argue there is a lack of free expression in this country.

We're not talking about censorship, we're talking about what the government allows its broadcast spectrum to be used for.

It's really the same thing, although censorship just sounds bad.

Very little is censored at all these days, what with the internet, cable, and satellite.

I'm not complaining about the current situation, just throwing my opinion out there.

---

_______________________________________________

Looks like the FCC has been "had" by a far right activist group. May answer why all the uproar is occurring.

Activists Dominate Content Complaints
December 06, 2004
By Todd Shields

In an appearance before Congress in February, when the controversy over Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl moment was at its height, Federal Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell laid some startling statistics on U.S. senators.

The number of indecency complaints had soared dramatically to more than 240,000 in the previous year, Powell said. The figure was up from roughly 14,000 in 2002, and from fewer than 350 in each of the two previous years. There was, Powell said, “a dramatic rise in public concern and outrage about what is being broadcast into their homes.”


What Powell did not reveal—apparently because he was unaware—was the source of the complaints. According to a new FCC estimate obtained by Mediaweek, nearly all indecency complaints in 2003—99.8 percent—were filed by the Parents Television Council, an activist group.

This year, the trend has continued, and perhaps intensified.

Through early October, 99.9 percent of indecency complaints—aside from those concerning the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” during the Super Bowl halftime show broadcast on CBS— were brought by the PTC, according to the FCC analysis dated Oct. 1. (The agency last week estimated it had received 1,068,767 complaints about broadcast indecency so far this year; the Super Bowl broadcast accounted for over 540,000, according to commissioners’ statements.)

The prominent role played by the PTC has raised concerns among critics of the FCC’s crackdown on indecency. “It means that really a tiny minority with a very focused political agenda is trying to censor American television and radio,” said Jonathan Rintels, president and executive director of the Center for Creative Voices in Media, an artists’ advocacy group.

PTC officials disagree.

“I wish we had that much power,” said Lara Mahaney, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles-based group. Mahaney said the issue should not be the source of complaints, but whether programming violates federal law prohibiting the broadcast of indecent matter when children are likely to be watching. “Why does it matter how the complaints come?” Mahaney said. “If the networks haven’t done anything illegal, if they haven’t done anything indecent, why do they care what we say?”

Powell, who said during the National Association of Broadcasters convention in Las Vegas in April that he was unsure how many complaints come from organized groups, addressed the question in an op-ed piece in The New York Times last Friday.

“Advocacy groups do generate many complaints, as our critics note, but that’s not unusual in today’s Internet world…that fact does not minimize the merits of the groups’ concerns,” Powell wrote.

Powell’s fellow Republican commissioner, Kathleen Abernathy, last week said that the agency does not let the number or the sources of complaints determine its indecency findings. “As long as you’re following precedents and the law, it shouldn’t matter,” Abernathy told Mediaweek.

At issue is a process that once relied upon aggrieved listeners and viewers contacting the FCC, but that increasingly is driven by organized groups with a focus on programming content. The FCC does not monitor programming for fear of assuming a role as national censor; it relies on complaints to initiate its indecency proceedings.

So far this year, the system has resulted in millions of dollars in settlements and proposed fines against broadcasters.

In such a system, even the number of complaints becomes an object of contention. For example, the agency on Oct. 12, in proposing fines of nearly $1.2 million against Fox Broadcasting and its affiliates, said it received 159 complaints against Married by America, which featured strippers partly obscured by pixilation.

But when asked, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau said it could find only 90 complaints from 23 individuals. (The smaller total was first reported by Internet-based TV writer Jeff Jarvis; Mediaweek independently obtained the Enforcement Bureau’s calculation.)

And Fox, in a filing last Friday, told the FCC that it should rescind the proposed fines, in part because the low number of complaints fell far short of indicating that community standards had been violated.

“All but four of the complaints were identical…and only one complainant professed even to have watched the program,” Fox said. It said the network and its stations had received 34 comments, “a miniscule total for a show that had a national audience of 5.1 million households.”

Even as some question whether the FCC should let the views of 23 people lead to fines, others take the agency to task for routinely failing to account for many of the complaints it receives. “Over 4,000 people filed a complaint against Married by America. Where do the complaints go?” asked the PTC’s Mahaney.

The PTC has worked hard to achieve its influence over broadcast content. Founded in 1995 by longtime conservative activist L. Brent Bozell III, it set out to make an impact in 2003, including what it called “a massive, coordinated and determined campaign” for more action by the FCC against broadcast indecency. “We delivered on that promise,” Bozell said in the group’s annual report.

The document listed tools developed by the PTC, including continual monitoring and archiving of broadcast network programs and “cutting-edge technology to make it easier for members to contact program sponsors, the FCC, or the networks directly with a simple click of the button.”

The result, the group said, was “a more than 2,400 percent increase in online activism.”