- Top federal judge uses pizza to explain complex Obamacare situation
- Obama, Biden overhaul job training programs
- Drought-plagued Californians turn to paint to keep lawns green
- ISIL now forcing Iraqi shopkeepers to veil mannequins in Mosul
- 11 parents of Nigeria’s abducted girls die
- Genetic mapping triggers new hope on schizophrenia
- Turkish P.M. Erdogan won’t speak to Obama, but he’ll take calls from Biden
- Israel’s ambassador praises Obama, slams Human Rights Watch report
- Md. parents accused of locking up autistic twin sons
- Dancing Kim Jong-un video sparks North Korea fury
Thousands slam proposal to relax FCC decency standards
Question of the Day
The battle over swearing and sex on the airways is still in full swing.
On April 1, the Federal Communications Commission asked for comment on a proposal to relax its standards on profanity and nudity for radio and network television.
Nearly 94,000 public comments have been filed, most of them negative, and 78 traditional-values groups Wednesday released a letter of protest to members of Congress.
“We urgently request that you do all you can to stop the proposed enforcement standard,” including opposing any nominee to the FCC who would support the proposal, leaders of the Parents Television Council, Morality in Media and dozens of other groups wrote to members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The letter was also sent to the five FCC commissioners.
Currently, FCC decency standards do not permit profanity and nudity on broadcasts using the publicly owned airwaves during times when children are likely to be in the audience. This generally means 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.
The proposal would change this policy to clarify that networks are liable for “deliberate and repetitive” profanities, but not when a random curse word slips out. Similarly isolated, nonsexual nudity would also no longer be actionable — meaning that a “wardrobe malfunction” during a Super Bowl halftime show would not result in a fine.
The comment period for the proposal runs through May 20, and will be followed by a reply period that ends June 18, FCC spokesman Mark Wigfield said Wednesday.
The FCC policy proposal follows a lawsuit over vulgar words spoken on awards shows aired by Fox television stations.
In its 2012 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the FCC can create laws to control indecent content without violating the Constitution — but “vague” regulations on indecency are not constitutional.
In September, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski asked for a review of the indecency policies and enforcement to ensure that they are “fully consistent” with the First Amendment.
To date, however, the overwhelming majority of the nearly 94,000 comments oppose the policy change.
“Please do NOT allow more sex, nudity, and bad language on network TV,” wrote a Florida woman. “Have some class for goodness sake,” said a woman, from Paducah, Ky.
Comments from the few supporters of the change urged the FCC “to advance beyond the Victorian era” and realize that “neither expletives nor non-sexual nudity should be considered indecent.”
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Cheryl Wetzstein covers family and social issues as a national reporter for The Washington Times. She has been a reporter for three decades, working in New York City and Washington, D.C. Since joining The Washington Times in 1985, she has been a features writer, environmental and consumer affairs reporter, and assistant business editor.
Beginning in 1994, Mrs. Wetzstein worked exclusively ...
- JAMA opinion piece calls for ending lifetime ban on blood donation by gay men
- HIV rate drops in U.S. for most groups; percentage for young gay, bisexual men up
- VH1's 'Naked Dating' outrages parents group
- Justina Pelletier talks to Republican lawmakers
- EEOC aims to stop discrimination against pregnant women
Latest Blog Entries
- Gay therapy ban author seeks Calif. House seat
- Transgender 'bathroom law' gets 5,000 more signatures
- Pro-life, stem-cell bill signed into law by Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback
- N. Dakota lawmakers approve tough abortion bill
- Pope Benedict XVI's successor should allow priests to get a new title: Husband, poll finds
TWT Video Picks
U.S. appetite for drugs begets violence migrants are fleeing
- Obamacare dealt massive setback by federal appeals court
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- Rep. Jared Polis' anti-fracking crusade riles Colorado
- Jewish woman booted from JetBlue flight over fight with Palestinian
- Hamas terrorists wear Israeli army uniforms to ambush soldiers in Gaza
- LYONS: Small-arms treaty, big Second Amendment threat
- YOUNG: A sinking presidency, deeper after November?
- Obama family set to buy $4.25M desert home in California: report
- PRUDEN: A deadly enemy within exacerbating immigration crisis
- MERRY: Handicaps in Hillary's way
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq