|
BLEEPING OUT REASON: Essence of FCC ‘Indecency’ Issue Gets Lost in 1st Amendment Battle (Guest in EDT)
Make no mistake. Few will argue the importance of protecting our right to free speech.
That includes Morality in Media (MIM) president, attorney Robert Peters, who is not so blindly passionate about the FCC’s policy of indecency that he is willing to see it hold any potential of being used as a tool to silence truth in broadcasting or even deprive the public of any inherent value in raw journalism.
So, when a U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled last week that the FCC’s “indecency policy,” in its current form, was too vague under the lens of the Constitution, those somewhat familiar with MIM’s mission may have been surprised to see Peters’ comments in a post-ruling press release.
But then, those who really know MIM, probably weren’t.
In the release, Peters expressed his understanding and respect for the Court’s decision, but also his belief in the need to have a policy in place, so long as it is written more coherently and enforced much more effectively and consistently.
But then he went on to express his real point of contention, that a “more coherent policy shouldn’t be needed” in a society guided by values above rules . . . That somewhere inside the legal mumbo-jumbo and the pundits’ after-the-fact commentary on the case, there is a shameful truth that gets lost and, therefore, goes on without remedy.
In other words, with the wrangling over the FCC’s indecency policy, the societal pendulum is swinging again. And cooler heads have to duck out of the way.
“In particular,” says Peters, “when it comes to the well-being of children, broadcasters should know what is and isn’t appropriate, and act accordingly. If they don’t know, they shouldn’t be broadcasters.”
He went on to say, “Not too many decades ago, the TV networks had an industry-wide code with self-imposed standards that generally reflected community standards, and that didn’t include a green light for ‘four-letter’ words. Back then, the networks knew better.
Not that they don’t know better now. But, today, they would rather play a cat-and-mouse game with the FCC, constantly pushing the envelope and, then, complaining that they don’t know whether the FCC will deem this or that transgression of community standards actionable.”
In the end, such shenanigans, devoid of any ethics or reasoning—even if they do masquerade as a stand on the moral high ground of Constitutional rights—only pose a further damaging effect on our society . . . and, in particular, our children.
For a further discussion on this fascinating examination of an otherwise obscure U.S. Court case, call Special Guests to book an interview with Bob Peters—a voice that will always make your audience think.
THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE MAY BE USEFUL FOR SHOW PREP:
http://broadcastengineering.com/newsrooms/appeals-court-finds-fcc-indecency-policy-inconstitutional-20100716/
ABOUT ROBERT PETERS:
Robert Peter is President of Morality in Media. He has been a guest on many television programs including three times on Larry King. He has been a diligent warrior in the fight against indecency for over two decades.
Headquartered in New York City, Morality In Media (MIM) works through constitutional means to curb traffic in illegal obscenity. MIM operates the www.obscenitycrimes.org website, where citizens can report possible violations of federal Internet obscenity laws.
Established in New York City in 1962 to combat pornography, Morality In Media works to inform citizens and public officials about the harms of pornography and about what they can do through law to protect their communities and children. MIM also works to maintain standards of decency on TV and in other media. Contributions are tax-exempt.
Morality In Media works through constitutional means to curb traffic in illegal obscenity. It operates the www.obscenitycrimes.org website, where citizens can report possible violations of federal Internet obscenity laws.
|
