House Passes Anti-Indeceny Bill

Ikohn4ever

Ikohn4ever

CAGiversary!
Feedback
5 (100%)
Despite warnings that it would have a chilling effect on free speech and encourage self-censorship, the House of Representatives on a 389-38 vote, approved a measure that could increase the fines meted out to stations violating the FCC's indecency rules by as much as $500,000. It also permits the agency to fine individuals the same amount.

The handful of lawmakers who opposed the legislation pointed out that worries about how the FCC might act had already resulted in numerous television stations refusing to air Saving Private Ryan and that small broadcasters would remain fearful of airing such programming given the fact that they could be bankrupted by a $500,000 fine. In a statement, NBC said the lawmakers' action "raises very serious constitutional and free speech issues. This approach of increased government regulation and censorship is fundamentally misguided." The White House, however, welcomed the vote by the House, saying that it would "make broadcast television and radio more suitable for family viewing."

the shit keeps on hitting the fan doesnt it
 
Just curious, but where's your source on this? Last I heard the bill explcitily states the amount of the fine would be based on company size and market share. So there's no real way a smaller broadcast/licensee company will should go bankrupt like you claim can be a possibility. Also, while there are probably going to be some self-censorship issues, obscene/indecent material isn't covered by the first amendment so there's no real constitutional issues. Yet deeming what is/isn't obscene is a gray area though.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Just curious, but where's your source on this? Last I heard the bill explcitily states the amount of the fine would be based on company size and market share. So there's no real way a smaller broadcast/licensee company will should go bankrupt like you claim can be a possibility. Also, while there are probably going to be some self-censorship issues, obscene/indecent material isn't covered by the first amendment so there's no real constitutional issues. Yet deeming what is/isn't obscene is a gray area though.[/quote]

here ya go Link
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']the shit keeps on hitting the fan doesnt it[/quote]

Sorry but I felt obligated to report the swear in this post to the nearest Thought Police station. In a short time there will be a black car waiting outside to take you to the "Soap in Mouth" rehabilitation center. Thank you for your continued support of Our Leader.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='Ikohn4ever']the shit keeps on hitting the fan doesnt it[/quote]

Sorry but I felt obligated to report the swear in this post to the nearest Thought Police station. In a short time there will be a black car waiting outside to take you to the "Soap in Mouth" rehabilitation center. Thank you for your continued support of Our Leader.[/quote]

Just got back from my vacatiabilitation, "All hail the leader", funny I have a scar on my forehead that I dont remember getting. Sensorchip is good me think
 
Again, the power is taken away from the consumer. As an adult, I should be paying for non-regulated uncensored cable. I can then use my power as consumer to advocate for items such as v-chips and rating systems to help me determine what is acceptable for me or my children to watch. Now it seems the government is being the parent for us. The FCC needs to be abolished.
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever'] it would "make broadcast television and radio more suitable for family viewing."
[/quote]

Why should it be? People should be able to watch what they want, and what they want to watch will dictate what is shown (not the government!). However, shows should probably provide some kind of warning system (like movies) so that people aren't surprised by nudity or violence, etc.

It always seems to come back to people not taking responsibility for their own actions, or their kids' actions.
 
Some parents are completely assinine, and take zero responsibilty for what their child sees and does. Its always someone else's fault except their own.
 
[quote name='Backlash'][quote name='Ikohn4ever'] it would "make broadcast television and radio more suitable for family viewing."
[/quote]

Why should it be? People should be able to watch what they want, and what they want to watch will dictate what is shown (not the government!). However, shows should probably provide some kind of warning system (like movies) so that people aren't surprised by nudity or violence, etc.

It always seems to come back to people not taking responsibility for their own actions, or their kids' actions.[/quote]

they already do

Y
Y7
T14
M
 
I should have been more clear: there is a ratings system, but I don't think it's as obvious as in movies. Do they always show the rating for a few seconds after a commercial break, or when they advertise the shows? That might help allow more freedom with respect to what can be shown on TV.
 
[quote name='Backlash']I should have been more clear: there is a ratings system, but I don't think it's as obvious as in movies. Do they always show the rating for a few seconds after a commercial break, or when they advertise the shows? That might help allow more freedom with respect to what can be shown on TV.[/quote]

Almost every CSI commercial break has the msg: "Graphic violence and sexual situations"
 
Many people want the government to make things 'better' for them and 'take care' of them. This goes for salary [minimum wage laws], rent [rent controls], retirement [the Ponzi scheme that is social security], and it's now being expanded to child raising, as if the public school systems weren't enough.
Proponents of the welfare state, this is the same thing. Merely another aspect of 'we'll take care of you.'

I don't have a problem with this, as long as it's focused only on the networks. The networks use 'public bandwidth', and just like I would be asked to leave if I stood on a street corner shouting obscenities or flashing Swank magazine, the networks should be held accountable. It's not censorship, programs can still be made and people can still say things, they just can't be broadcast 'in public.'
Now, if they expand this to affect cable or pay networks, I have a problem with that..
 
every tv manufactured now is required to have a v-chip. Setting it will block any shows with a certain rating. Let parents be the parents, not government.
 
[quote name='neopolss']every tv manufactured now is required to have a v-chip. Setting it will block any shows with a certain rating. Let parents be the parents, not government.[/quote]

Every TV ever made has had an On/Off switch too but some folks have a hard time learning how to use it.
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Just curious, but where's your source on this? Last I heard the bill explcitily states the amount of the fine would be based on company size and market share. So there's no real way a smaller broadcast/licensee company will should go bankrupt like you claim can be a possibility. Also, while there are probably going to be some self-censorship issues, obscene/indecent material isn't covered by the first amendment so there's no real constitutional issues. Yet deeming what is/isn't obscene is a gray area though.[/quote]

here ya go Link[/quote]

Hmm well it has ibeen sometime since I intially read the proposed bill I wonder if they removed that section then, don't know why they would though as it seemed a good idea.

And neopolss you have to open your eyes to the real world. No matter how easy technecholgy and other such things dumb down parenting there's still a large amount of parents that aren't going to care enough and will always try to pass the buck to somebody else which usually ends up being the governemnt.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']

And neopolss you have to open your eyes to the real world. No matter how easy technecholgy and other such things dumb down parenting there's still a large amount of parents that aren't going to care enough and will always try to pass the buck to somebody else which usually ends up being the governemnt.[/quote]

The we should address that problem. Lawsuit reform is a step in the right direction.
 
My eyes are open to the real world. I'm simply opening your eyes to see the actions that these "buck-passing" parents are taking. Perhaps you will see a need to counter that actions and stop support of "moral legislation."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top