Photos
Blog
NewslettersA powerful FCC means trouble for free speech
thager@beaufortgazette.com
843-986-5534
During a Supreme Court hearing last week, U.S. Solicitor General Gregory G. Garre argued that if the Federal Communications Commission were not allowed to do its job, society as we know it would crumble. "The extreme example (is) of Big Bird dropping the f-bomb on 'Sesame Street'" he said.
E-Mail it
Print it
tool name
closeAlso in this section
Did you get that? Without the FCC, Big Bird might be cursing on "Sesame Street." It could happen! What rational parent would want that? Please, Mr. U.S. Senator, save us from that foul-mouthed yellow bird!
This is exactly what the "standards are falling" Chicken Littles want you to think every time someone tries to challenge broadcast indecency. The Supreme Court has stepped in because of a lawsuit challenging the FCC's fining of networks for broadcasting fleeting expletives -- when someone curses on live TV.
They didn't previously fine for that because, you know, we live in the real world and occasionally idiots like Nicole Richie or Bono or Dick Cheney say bad things around open mics. But post-Janet Jackson, the FCCded it was the sole agency that could save our society from the scourge of dirty words. As of press time, the court hasn't ruled, but how they swing the gavel will impact you in ways you heretofore might not realize.
I'm on record for being anti-FCC. But I do not believe that Big Bird should throw the F-word around on "Sesame Street." If that happened, though, a., it would be the greatest YouTube clip EVER, and, b., parents would rise up in a wave of righteous anger that would cripple the kids show and surely end its reign on PBS. Seriously. They'd wipe it off the planet.
See, that's how things SHOULD work when you have freedom of speech. You can say whatever you want, but then I get to exercise my freedom to disagree and to vote with my ad dollars and viewership numbers. The marketplace works.
But if you think indecency lawsuits and aggressive fines from the government's lap dog, the FCC, will only wipe away smut, well, you're wrong. Once the politicians get their feet in your door, they will continue to barrel through.
Have you heard of the Fairness Doctrine? That pre-1987 FCC policy that required broadcast license holders to not only present controversial issues of public importance but to do so in a manner that was, well, fair and balanced? Some members in Congress want to see it brought back. Forcing radio stations to be stewards of the public airwaves and present opposing viewpoints would, likely, cripple conservative talk radio. More time for progressive voices means less time for the Rush O'Hannity.
President Barack Obama has said he is not in favor of bringing it back, but this is politics, so it still could happen. And the problem is that the political side most likely to be against it -- that would be the Right -- were the same cheerleaders who ushered in the post-Janet Jackson wave of "let's give the FCC more power to control what we watch and listen to" hoopla. Not only did they start this nonsense, they gave the Left moral highground.
Sen. Chuck Shumer, D-NY, already has taken it, telling Fox News recently, "The very same people who don't want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC to limit pornography on the air. I am for that. I think pornography should be limited. But you can't say, 'government hands off in one area' to a commercial enterprise, but you're allowed to intervene in another. That's not consistent."
Yeah, well, he has a point. As infuriating as it is to think that either side -- not to mention their constituents -- are once again poised to give the Federal government MORE control over what they listen to or watch, that's exactly what might happen.
Look, I'm for getting Rush Limbaugh off the air. I rejoice for the day. But I want it to happen the old-fashioned way: people stop listening, advertisers reject him. If he were a smaller man, I'd say he fades away, but that is physically impossible, so he can just decrease in cultural mass.
What I don't want are some jack-booted FCC thugs rushing in, forcing stations to find alternative programming. I don't want them intervening with HBO or morning drive-time or live World Series broadcasts or, gulp, even Sean Hannity's right to be wrong. This is the ultimate "be careful what you wish for" scenario. Government intervention is an easy fix, but the price is huge.
At the end of the day, we're just talking about words. We're a nation of adults. We're capable of tuning them out.
@Nyx.CommentBody@