FCC bitch-slapped!

[Gurm]

Anyone hear about the 2nd circuit court (I think) ruling today?

Essentially it said the FCC can't levy fines for spontaneous live utterances or showings. That means no more million-dollar fines for Janet Jackson's non-nipple, or for soldiers yelling "f*ck" as mortars explode near them.

And... legal analysts are saying that the wording essentially sets precedent to eliminate FCC fines entirely!

NICE!

[Jessterw]

Wouldn't the easiest move just be to eliminate this ignorant view of words as so inherently bad that they require such fines? Seriously. Words can have negative connotations, but to cling unto this notion that a word is 'bad' is silly.

If the meaning of the word is the problem then why are plays on any given 'curse' word allowed? Not that I don't love fracking and all

But I digress. This is good news and I've gone off on a tangent

[Technoid]

Will this mean that I in the future will get to hear exactly what swear word was used on the discovery shows from US that I infrequently watch? (Mythbusters, american shopers etc etc)

[Gurm]

Will this mean that I in the future will get to hear exactly what swear word was used on the discovery shows from US that I infrequently watch? (Mythbusters, american shopers etc etc)

Pretty much, yes.

[schmosef]

Will this mean that I in the future will get to hear exactly what swear word was used on the discovery shows from US that I infrequently watch? (Mythbusters, american shopers etc etc)

I think only for shows that are broadcast live.

[Technoid]

I think only for shows that are broadcast live.

I think it so >BLEEP< annoying when they use those >BLEEP< bleeps!

[ND66]

I think it so >BLEEP< annoying when they use those >BLEEP< bleeps!

LOL!


.

[Gurm]

I think only for shows that are broadcast live.

The original ruling specifically mentions "inadvertant utterances" or some such. But the issue at hand is that they have specifically forbidden excessive fines. The truth of the matter is that there is NO legislation which defines what is and isn't permissible in a broadcast. The only laws which exist are vague and talk about putting racier content on later in the evening so the kids don't hear it. (Clearly from the 50's!)

What this ruling does is take the teeth away from the FCC. There's no LAW that says that you can't drop the F-bomb on the radio. The FCC just fines you. And there's no LAW that says you have to pay the fine. They just refuse to renew your license. And why are they allowed to hold you hostage like this? Because it used to be "within their mandate". Where I come from, that's called "legalized extortion".

But this ruling says that it's NOT within their mandate to levy ridiculous fines and hold your broadcast license hostage. And that's the first step in dismantling their "moral authority". The PURPOSE of the FCC is to monitor and regulate the distribution of the airwaves. Figure out who gets which bandwidth, and make sure nobody is swiping anyone else's. How that evolved over time into out-and-out censorship is a long story.

Here's a good breakdown of the various arguments. Note how retarded the FCC sounds. They're essentially going "well we just want to protect people by telling them what to think..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/04/AR2007060400875.html

[Technoid]

Are they (FCC) Nucking Futs?!?

"The Parents Television Council" are definitly Nucking Futs