Supreme Court To Rule On TV Censorship

Khashishi writes "The LA times and the Associated Press report that the FCC v. Fox Television Stations case is being heard in the Supreme Court. The FCC policy would impose a heavy fine on use of 'indecent' words on broadcast television, which Fox and others are claiming is a violation of free speech. The case was appealed after being ruled in Fox's favor in a federal appeals court in New York. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Antonin Scalia support the FCC policy of censorship." Here's a transcript (PDF) of the oral arguments.

Comments

2 Elephants in the Room

[TheCarp]

Ginsberg said that there is an elephant in the room: The First Ammendment.

As I read it, I see another one:

The solicitor general was unswayed. When "celebrities use particularly graphic, vulgar, explicit, indecent language as part of the comedic routine," he said, there is "potentially greater harmful impact on children."

Potential Harmful impact? Ok... PROVE HARM.

Thats all, prove harm. Even prove potential for harm. Whats the scope of this supposed "harm"? How does this "harm" happen? How do we even know its real?

-Steve

Re:2 Elephants in the Room

[bill_mcgonigle]

When did vulgar profane speech become harmless and the Bible become harmful?

Let's compare body counts, shall we? We can skip everything before the Crusades if you'd like a handicap on this hole.

I belive that mom and dad should be allowed to determine what may or may not be harmful to their children. I deem it harmful. No proof necessary.

I fully back you on this. Now, control your children.

Re:Conservative moralists vs. Fox?!?

[Ethanol-fueled]

You're forgetting that Fox made famous The Simpsons, Family Guy, Married...with Children, and many other shows which wouldn't have been given chances on other networks.

Incidentally most consumers of Fox News are too narrow-minded to realize this...or maybe being bad is okay only when it applies to them!

Oh really?

[mweather]

The words in question begin with the letters "F" and "S." The Associated Press typically does not use them. "The reason these words shock is because of their association with a literal meaning," Chief Justice John Roberts said, suggesting his support for the policy

Then why are we allowed to say copulation and feces on TV?

Re:Or...

[Ethanol-fueled]

or

5. Make as much money as possible, consistency be damned.

Re:Conservative moralists vs. Fox?!?

[timothy]

"Incidentally most consumers of Fox News are too narrow-minded to realize this..."

On the other hand, lots of the criticism I've seen aimed at the Fox network has been pretty narrow-minded, too. There are plenty of broad brushes to go around, it seems.

timothy