Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Communications Law
Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips
Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips
UF Law Faculty Publications
Using the WDBJ case as an analytical springboard, this article examines the tumultuous state of the FCC's indecency enforcement regime more than three years after the Supreme Court's June 2012 opinion in Fox Television Stations. Part I of this article briefly explores the missed First Amendment opportunities in Fox Television Stations, as well as some possible reasons why the Supreme Court chose to avoid the free-speech questions in that case." Part II addresses the FCC's decision in September 2012 to target only egregious instances of broadcast indecency and, in the process, to jettison hundreds of thousands of complaints that had …
Constitutional Law - Due Process Clause - The Due Process Clause Of The Fifth Amendment Requires Fair Notice Of What Violates Federal Indecency Standards, Jon L. Mills
UF Law Faculty Publications
Casenote regarding Fed. Commc’ns Comm’n v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 2307 (2012).
The Constitutional Considerations Of Multiple Media Ownership Regulation By The Federal Communications Commission, Jon L. Mills, John Moynahan, Richard Perlini, George Mcclure
The Constitutional Considerations Of Multiple Media Ownership Regulation By The Federal Communications Commission, Jon L. Mills, John Moynahan, Richard Perlini, George Mcclure
UF Law Faculty Publications
Promoting the dissemination of diverse ideas with a minimum of governmental interference is the goal of the first amendment in protecting free press and free media. This goal is implicit in the public interest mandate of the Communications Act of 1934. A precise balance between restraint and diversity in first amendment policy appears impossible, but the process of decision should reflect both, with deference to restraint where possible. The Federal Communication Commission's Order in Docket 18110 failed to strike such a balance; any future action regarding cross-ownership of broadcast stations by newspapers would benefit by an increased recognition of the …