Slashdot Mirror


Michael Powell to Leave FCC

Anonymous Slashdotter writes "Michael Powell, chairman of the FCC, will be stepping down from his post soon. 'Powell, who maintained a light regulatory hand as the nation's chief media watchdog but collected some of the largest indecency fines against U.S. broadcasters, planned to issue a statement Friday but was not expected to hold a formal news conference, these officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.'"

7 of 409 comments (clear)

  1. I for one... by Deep+Fried+Geekboy · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... shan't miss him.

    Check out his on-air confrontation with Howard Stern from a couple of months ago... riveting stuff.

    --

    I'm not wrong. You haven't thought about it hard enough.

  2. Re:Stern.. by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Informative
    So did Howard Stern win or lose?

    Howard actually won big assuming Sirius keeps the checks coming to him and they don't bounce.

    ...a five-year, $500 million deal...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  3. Re:What does Howard Stern Say? by oldave · · Score: 5, Informative

    First... Stern's going to Sirius... that'd be the correct spelling.

    Second, the Commission is limited in who it can fine for what reasons. Since Stern is not a licensee, is not deliberately or inadvertantly interfering with other communications and isn't operating radio transmitting equipment without a license, the FCC can't fine him. They can only fine the "person" responsible for the broadcast - the station owner, who *is* a licensee, and as a condition of licensing, agreed to follow FCC rules.

    Remember, Infinity chose to employ Stern and broadcast his program. Clear Channel chose to carry his show. Other groups/stations chose to carry his show.

    Similarly, Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake are not Commission licensees, were not operating any type of transmitting equipment and weren't interfering with anything. So neither could be fined by the FCC.

    The licensee is the one with the burden of preventing indecent material from reaching the air, not the performers.

    Now, I don't personally agree with fining them. My own view is that there are two buttons on a radio or television -- one changes the channel, the other one turns it off. Use them, monitor what your children listen to/watch and don't expect the government to babysit for you.

  4. It may not be too late for Ham Radio by EmagGeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't know whether it's too late to un-do all the damage he has done to Amateur Radio by coating BPL with teflon and ramming it through - but hopefully common sense will prevail and BPL will be shelved...

  5. Re:FCC is for regulation of frequencies, not conte by ellem · · Score: 4, Informative

    Close -- but Nixon gave them the power over content.

    --
    This .sig is fake but accurate.
  6. Re:FCC is for regulation of frequencies, not conte by Martin+Blank · · Score: 4, Informative

    They have been taken to court over the First Amendment, and the Supreme Court has ruled that it is within the public interest to have the FCC place reasonable restrictions on content aired within certain times over public airwaves. Moreover, even outside of those times, it is legal to limit broadcast material over public airwaves that is patently offensive. Transmissions over more limited media (cable and satellite) do not fall within the domain of the FCC, as has been determined by the courts on occasion, and which I believe even Michael Powell has stated in declining to get involved in certain satellite and cable broadcast issues (don't recall them specifically offhand).

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  7. Re:Vonage might not exist today w/o Powell. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not to spoil your fun being an oppressed Republican and all. But I would prefer, in the spirit of your "giving credit where credit is due" post, why give Powell and the FCC for what the FTC is doing? Check it out.