Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court to Hear FCC Indecency Case
MachineShedFred writes "The Supreme Court of the United States has announced that it will be hearing the FCC's appeal to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision that the FCC has changed its policy on fleeting expletives without adequate explanation. It's now on the FCC to explain to the Supreme Court why its policy has changed. This is also the first time the Supreme Court has heard a major 'broadcast indecency' case in 30 years."
Why is it that adults can't act their age and a) change the station when they hear something that offends them or b) contact the station directly to deal with their frustration. If enough people change the station when they hear something offensive, the sponsors will stop putting their ads during a certain programme and the programme will get pulled. If enough people decide that they like shows where people can say "fuck" then the show will stay on the air. Why can't it just work like this?
Also, don't get into this "think of the children!" business. When I was a kid (which wasn't that long ago) there were a lot of shows I wasn't allowed watching because my parents didn't allow me to watch them (I was also only really allowed to listen to one radio station). My parents television got the channels with these shows that I wasn't allowed watching, but they kept an eye on my television habits instead of using tv like a baby-sitter or substitute parent and expecting a government to keep me from seeing or hearing inappropriate things.
what's that now?
I'm not going to argue that censorship is legitimate or necessary, but if you don't like censorship, pay for channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.) which do not have censorship. You still have options, albeit options you may not like. Censoring expletives does not so radically limit your rights that any court will side with the "You are taking away my God-given privileges" argument.