Ah, so no answer.
Well since you'd like to sit quiet:
Indecency is not defined because it cannot be defined. It is essentially what the market can bear at that very moment. What is carried in one publication or on broadcast in one market is different from what's in another market. It, simply, is impossible to define.
While you can't define indecency, you say he's crossed the line. Don't listen to him. Don't watch two men kiss. I don't find it indecent and I want to see it. Some found the violence in movies indecent, yet the violence in The Passion was acceptable.
You say they are in the process of defining it - in fact you say "it's obvious". You can't define indecency, you can't answer my questions because you're not a member of congress or work for the FCC, but it's obvious.
The FCC has come after Stern before. They can't define indecency. Standards are never even stated.
Again, you can still answer this question. What companies own the radio broadcast market and to what extent? You don't need to be a congressman for that.
Conservatives should be supporting freedom of speech. This isn't Stalin's playground. I don't support parades in the middle of the street with naked chicks, but I should be allowed to listen to what I want, when I want, in my own privacy even.
-Rudey
Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
No, I wouldn't like to answer your questions, because I'm not entitled to. I am neither a Member of Congress nor do I sit on, or work for, the FCC.
I don't pretend to be a member of the Moralty Police, but I can define indecency for myself, and frankly, Stern crosses that line. But, I would not propose to define it for you or anyone else. On the other hand, I guess Congress feels that they have that right and authority. If they haven't defined it yet, it's obvious that they are in the process.
I was taught, though, that the use, for profit or not, of the "public's airwaves" was a privilege granted by the government to broadcast in the public's "interest, convenience and necessity," to borrow words from the original "Act." I have spent a long career trying to live up to those directions. I personally don't believe that soft porn is part of any of those definitions. It has saddened me that some members of my profession have not chosen to operate to those standards.
My comments to now have been purely to point out a broadcast management point of view as I see it in this particular case. The only reason I do that is that I have been in that business and feel I have the background and some perspective on how those decisions are made.
|