McPain supports Censorship

[Unclean]

John McPain is a cosponsor of a bill (S.1780) introduced in the Senate last year that would give the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to criminalize the broadcast on public radio or tv of any single word or image that it determines to be "indecent."

To appreciate why this is significant, you have to have a little background about FCC policy on indecency rules in broadcasting prior to the Bush administration.

The FCC first announced it would exercise its authority to punish the broadcast of seven specific dirty words in 1975. This came in response to radio monologue by comedian George Carlin that contained these words which it considered indecent.

(FCC defines indecent as language or material that depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs.)

The Supreme Court upheld the FCC's authority to restrict broadcast language in a 1978 ruling, saying that broadcast language is a special kind of language (in terms of the First Amendment protection of free speech) because children may hear it.

Up until the Bush administration, the FCC essentially took 3 factors into consideration in determining whether material is patently offensive and indecent:

1. the explicit or graphic nature of the description or depiction of sexual or excretory organs or activities;

2. whether the material dwells on or repeats these activities at length;

3. whether the material appears to pander or is used to titillate or appears to have been presented for its shock value.


Then, during the 2003 Golden Globes Award live broadcast, rock musician Bono said, "F****** brilliant." Despite the fact that this was a single utterance, which does not appear to meet any of the 3 criteria above, the FCC under the Bush administration decided that even that single utterance of the F-word was indecent.

In June last year, a US Court of Appeals rejected the FCC's decision to ignore the previously-used criteria for determining broadcast indecency, concluding that the FCC's decision had been arbitrary and capricious.

The Bill that Sen. McPain is cosponsoring would give the FCC the specific legal authority to judge the utterance of even a single word (or broadcast of a single image) indecent.

[Unclean]

And here's what the ultraconservative American Family Association has to say about McPain's bill on their website, under the AFA Activism tab:

Activist judges rule - FCC must allow nudity on prime-time TV
U.S. Senate is a single vote away from stopping this nonsense!
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday threw out the FCC's $550,000 indecency fine against CBS for the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show that ended with Janet Jackson's breast-baring "wardrobe malfunction."

CBS purposely "shopped around" in order to find a "friendly court" in which to file a law suit against the FCC. As a result, three liberal judges callously dismissed the fine, essentially giving networks court-approval to broadcast nud-ty on tax-payer funded airwaves anytime of the day or night.

This dangerous precedent now jeopardizes other FCC fines currently being appealed by the morally bankrupt NBC, CBS, ABC, and Fox networks. As a result of the ruling by three judges, networks have won the right to do what they've wanted for a long time - to be as nasty as they want to be.

TAKE ACTION
...
Ask your Senator to sponsor and vote in favor of S. 1780 today! ...

If the FCC is on ur side, u KNOW something is wrong. If they have their way, even porn that's rated R and comes on at 2 am would look like Little House on the Prarie. Mmmm, nothing like some mindless hypocritical censorship in the morning.

[mrrobbie]

Come Jan. 09....We won't have to put up with these nasty republican bastards anymore...McCain & Wife, Junior & his crook of a VP & the rest of the lot...Byeeeeeeeeeee!!!

[Unclean]

Originally Posted by mrrobbie

Come Jan. 09....We won't have to put up with these nasty republican bastards anymore...McCain & Wife, Junior & his crook of a VP & the rest of the lot...Byeeeeeeeeeee!!!

Although I agree with that sentiment, it's the uptight people (mostly conservatives) who are the problem in this case. The bill was sponsored by Blue Dog Democrat Rockefeller, and has other Democrats, such as Robert Byrd, along with Republicans as cosponsors.

[ComNavFdgPk]

Originally Posted by marleyisalegend

If the FCC is on ur side, u KNOW something is wrong...

It's not like they are banning porn sites or rated R movies. For those that actually care about raising kids with a healthy mind understand how hard it is with today's TV programs. Besides, how often does FCC sensor stuff, and if they do it does mean someone has fucked up at the editing booth. Don't worry people the conservatives are not going to shut down JUB. lol

[Unclean]

Originally Posted by F22-Raptor

It's not like they are banning porn sites or rated R movies. For those that actually care about raising kids with a healthy mind understand how hard it is with today's TV programs. Besides, how often does FCC sensor stuff, and if they do it does mean someone has fucked up at the editing booth. Don't worry people the conservatives are not going to shut down JUB. lol

So it's fine for them to see knifings, bludgeonings, machine gunnings, etc ad nauseam, but a kid hearing "F-ing brilliant" will be scarred for life?

[Glafna]

Haven't you heard, the kids love the violence, but the parents don't like the potty mouths that come from hearing swear words on TV, or the "corruption of innocence" that comes from seeing 'boobies' at a young age.

[thatcrap]

Oh, wait.... Do you mean that a Republican is for censorship? Why, not that group of archaic puritans, I say!