Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Communications Law
When Does F*** Not Mean F***?: Fcc V. Fox Television Stations And A Call For Protecting Emotive Speech, W. Wat Hopkins
When Does F*** Not Mean F***?: Fcc V. Fox Television Stations And A Call For Protecting Emotive Speech, W. Wat Hopkins
Federal Communications Law Journal
The Supreme Court of the United States does not always deal cogently with nontraditional language. The most recent example is FCC v. Fox Television Stations, in which the Justices became sidetracked into attempting to define the f-word and then to determine whether, when used as a fleeting expletive rather than repeatedly, the word is indecent for broadcast purposes. The Court would do well to avoid definitions and heed Justice John Marshall Harlan's advice in Cohen v. California to provide protection for the emotive, as well as the cognitive, element of speech
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 …
Recent Developments In Program Content Regulation, Richard E. Wiley, Lawrence W. Secrest
Recent Developments In Program Content Regulation, Richard E. Wiley, Lawrence W. Secrest
Federal Communications Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Avoiding Slim Reasoning And Shady Results: A Proposal For Indecency And Obscenity Regulation In Radio And Broadcast Television, Jacob T. Rigney
Avoiding Slim Reasoning And Shady Results: A Proposal For Indecency And Obscenity Regulation In Radio And Broadcast Television, Jacob T. Rigney
Federal Communications Law Journal
This Note explores the relevant law regarding the issue of indecency and obscenity in broadcast, with particular focus on a 2001 Policy Statement released by the FCC. The Author examines the major problems with the regulatory scheme as it now exists, and offers an alternative. The Author concludes by arguing that leaving the subjective decisions regarding indecency to market forces, leaving parents to determine what should or should not be indecent, and leaving the FCC free to pursue obscenity with greater zeal is the most appropriate course of action for the future.
"Chilling" The Internet? Lessons From Fcc Regulation Of Radio Broadcasting , Thomas W. Hazlett, David W. Sosa
"Chilling" The Internet? Lessons From Fcc Regulation Of Radio Broadcasting , Thomas W. Hazlett, David W. Sosa
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Congress included the Communications Decency Act (CDA) in the Telecommunications Act signed into law on February 8, 1996. The bill seeks to outlaw the use of computers and phone lines to transmit "indecent" material with provisions of jail terms and heavy fines for violators. Proponents of the bill argue it is necessary to protect minors from undesirable speech on the Internet. The CDA was immediately challenged in court by the American Civil Liberties Union, and the special 3-judge federal panel established to hear the case recently declared the Act unconstitutional. Yet, its ultimate adjudication remains in doubt. Ominously, the federal …
Information Superhighway Or Technological Sewer: What Will It Be?, Robert W. Peters
Information Superhighway Or Technological Sewer: What Will It Be?, Robert W. Peters
Federal Communications Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Abortion On The Air: Broadcasters And Indecent Political Advertising, Milagros Rivera-Sanchez, Paul H. Gates Jr.
Abortion On The Air: Broadcasters And Indecent Political Advertising, Milagros Rivera-Sanchez, Paul H. Gates Jr.
Federal Communications Law Journal
Section 315(a) of the Communications Act--the anti-censorship provision--allows for the presentation of candidates' unvarnished positions on issues important to the voting public. In the 1990s, ads centered around abortion caused a collision between the interests of political candidates and broadcasters. The Article reviews broadcasters' attempts to use the indecency provisions of the Communications Act to channel controversial political advertisements. The Authors conclude that airing potentially indecent political ads is unlikely to result in sanctions for broadcasters.