Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Supreme Court upholds regulation of 'indecent' language on TV
Los Angeles Times: "Reporting from Washington -- The Supreme Court said today that TV viewers should not be hit with the 'F-word' or the 'S-word' during prime-time broadcasts, upholding the government's power to impose huge fines on broadcasters for airing a single expletive."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
It seems like this law is a violation of the first amendment. How can the Supreme Court regulate the language on TV? I guess it makes sense that they want it to be family friendly, but impressing large fines doesn't mean that the companies will follow. I guess we shall have to wait the one to two years to find out if this decision changes.
As much as I like seeing the government try to regulate the broadcast monopolies, this law seems very overreaching. Especially with the prevalence of companies distributing shows through broadcast (FCC regulated) and the internet (not largely regulated for content) it is silly for these companies to be worrying about what is essentially censorship of just one of their delivery modes. It seems moreover like these rules don't hurt the major broadcast companies that much (they can handle the fines) but are a big dark cloud over smaller or independent producers.
One of the people in my interpretation and argument spoke on this article (I know, something actually applicable from that class) and said that in fact based upon hoe current broadcast rights are written, this is totally within the scope of rights. While I do believe that at the basis of the argument a true first amendment violation does exist,. In trying to create a TV environment that is accessible to people of any age, this kid of restriction is necessary. However, I am slightly surprised that this was upheld in the court and as Kat said, I think that this will change in the next few years.
I find it interesting that the government is trying to limit the broadcasting rights of the tv networks. As Ethan mentioned, the FCC already regulates what can be shown. I also feel that if and when this goes back to court it may change. No matter how much we try to protect our children, they are so exposed to swears already, I don't know if limiting it on tv will do much, especially when this may be a violation of the first amendment.
I don't really have a problem with the court's decision. The FCC isn't censoring ideas, just individual words that usually don't add much to the speaker's meaning. These are words that offend some people, and I think it's reasonable that most people don't want their kids exposed to them if it can be easily prevented. It seems a little silly to invoke the First Amendment just to make it acceptable to swear on broadcast TV. There are plenty of other forums where such language is acceptable.
Post a Comment