Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Space, The Final Frontier-Expanding Fcc Regulation Of Indecent Content Onto Direct Broadcast Satellite, John C. Quale, Malcolm J. Tuesley
Space, The Final Frontier-Expanding Fcc Regulation Of Indecent Content Onto Direct Broadcast Satellite, John C. Quale, Malcolm J. Tuesley
Federal Communications Law Journal
The vast majority of viewers today receive video programming from multichannel video programming providers-mostly cable television or direct broadcast satellite ("DBS")-rather than directly over-the-air from broadcast stations. While the FCC has not hesitated to sanction broadcasters for what it deems to be indecent content, it consistently has found that it lacks the authority to regulate indecency on subscription services like cable television. Citizens groups and some in Congress now seek to extend indecency restrictions to DBS services under existing law or through the enactment of new legislation. It is true that DBS, because of its use of radio spectrum to …
In The Dark: A Consumer Perspective On Fcc Broadcast Indecency Denials, Genelle I. Belmas, Gail D. Love, Brian C. Foy
In The Dark: A Consumer Perspective On Fcc Broadcast Indecency Denials, Genelle I. Belmas, Gail D. Love, Brian C. Foy
Federal Communications Law Journal
Indecency regulation has been a hot political and social topic since Janet Jackson revealed her breast during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. The number of indecency complaints the FCC receives each year continues to rise. Moreover, to further complicate matters, in 2007 the Second Circuit overturned the FCC policy that so-called "fleeting expletives" would be considered indecent. However, there has been no systematic review of the complaints from the perspective of the complainant. How has the FCC managed its increasing indecency complaint load, and what does it tell consumers who have taken the time to write formal complaints about …
A Soldier's Blog: Balancing Service Members' Personal Rights Vs. National Security Interests, Tatum H. Lytle
A Soldier's Blog: Balancing Service Members' Personal Rights Vs. National Security Interests, Tatum H. Lytle
Federal Communications Law Journal
This Note examines the competing interests between ensuring military personnel's freedom of speech while protecting national security interests. The Author recognizes the necessity of protecting national security interests but emphasizes that military personnel's rights to free speech must be protected as long as such speech poses no threat to military security. In conclusion, clearer protections must be implemented to protect military personnel's right to free speech.