Because, of course, they have nothing more pressing to attend to, Congress is now making moves to repeal the major Networks’ recent court victory over the FCC’s “fleeting expletive” ruling. A week after a Senate panel rejected one anal attempt to apply 19th-century regulations to 21st century life, the Senate's 'Commerce Committee' without any dalliance with such trivia as fair debate, sent almost identical legislation to the Senate floor.
Sponsored by Sen. Jay Rockefeller [D.Va.], the legislation requires the FCC to “maintain a policy that a single word or image may constitute indecent programming.”
The FCC, bowing to pressure from members of Congress looking to impress the Electorate in time to keep their jobs, has been stepping up its policing of expletive incidents as part of expanded indecency enforcement following Janet Jackson's Superbowl publicity stunt in 2004. Broadcasters have been fighting the changes, arguing they overturn 30-years of FCC policy [and common sense] and are unconstitutional because it’s not clear what exactly is allowed.
The issue came to a head after the FCC determined that comments aired by Fox and made by Nicole Richie and Cher during the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards amounted to 'indecency.' That ruling made it clear the FCC hadn’t bothered to explain their reasons for changing its long-standing previous policy. The new legislation would let the FCC claim the change was a result of orders from Congress.
Sen. Rockefeller and FCC Chairman, Kevin J. Martin, said they were hopeful the legislation would send a clear message.
“I appreciate the actions which affirmed the Commission’s ability to protect our children...Members of Congress stated once again what we on the Commission and every parent already knows: Even a single word or image can be indecent.” said Martin.
Meanwhile, Sen. Rockefeller called the FCC’s move, “long overdue.” He explained, “This legislation is a small but critical step in making sure that the airwaves remain free of words and images that are patently offensive to the vast majority of Americans.”
Isn't it curious how those who claim to speak for 'the majority of the people' are always someone the majority of the people have never heard of.
This ridiculous motion raises three points: With US soldiers dying on an hourly basis, fighting a war that is now utterly devoid of the merest scintilla of justification, would it be so impossible for our elected leaders to discover something more worthwhile and urgent on which to expend their time? Second, to impose prurient language restrictions on a medium committed to the portrayal of 'reality' is as unconscionable as it is patronizing; Television is supposedly the portrayal of life, and in real life, at least that variety of it found outside the rarefied atmosphere of the Capitol Dome, the vernacular can get a little colorful. And third, when did the Democrats turn into the GOP?? For some of the Elephant's more intellectually disconnected, southern-fried 'good ol boys' to conceive an example of legislative lip-diddling as endlessly risible as this would be effortlessly predictable. For those who follow the Donkey to claim its parentage is stupefying.
We already have the means to control 'indecency'; A remote. And the 'majority of the people' should not be required to tolerate an endless diet of G-rated dialog just because a handful of parents are too lazy and stupid to master its operation.
If this truly is the most vital issue our Representatives can find on which to invest their energies, it's a relief to know the forthcoming elections will give 'the majority' a chance to relieve them of the burden.
Sponsored by Sen. Jay Rockefeller [D.Va.], the legislation requires the FCC to “maintain a policy that a single word or image may constitute indecent programming.”
The FCC, bowing to pressure from members of Congress looking to impress the Electorate in time to keep their jobs, has been stepping up its policing of expletive incidents as part of expanded indecency enforcement following Janet Jackson's Superbowl publicity stunt in 2004. Broadcasters have been fighting the changes, arguing they overturn 30-years of FCC policy [and common sense] and are unconstitutional because it’s not clear what exactly is allowed.
The issue came to a head after the FCC determined that comments aired by Fox and made by Nicole Richie and Cher during the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards amounted to 'indecency.' That ruling made it clear the FCC hadn’t bothered to explain their reasons for changing its long-standing previous policy. The new legislation would let the FCC claim the change was a result of orders from Congress.
Sen. Rockefeller and FCC Chairman, Kevin J. Martin, said they were hopeful the legislation would send a clear message.
“I appreciate the actions which affirmed the Commission’s ability to protect our children...Members of Congress stated once again what we on the Commission and every parent already knows: Even a single word or image can be indecent.” said Martin.
Meanwhile, Sen. Rockefeller called the FCC’s move, “long overdue.” He explained, “This legislation is a small but critical step in making sure that the airwaves remain free of words and images that are patently offensive to the vast majority of Americans.”
Isn't it curious how those who claim to speak for 'the majority of the people' are always someone the majority of the people have never heard of.
This ridiculous motion raises three points: With US soldiers dying on an hourly basis, fighting a war that is now utterly devoid of the merest scintilla of justification, would it be so impossible for our elected leaders to discover something more worthwhile and urgent on which to expend their time? Second, to impose prurient language restrictions on a medium committed to the portrayal of 'reality' is as unconscionable as it is patronizing; Television is supposedly the portrayal of life, and in real life, at least that variety of it found outside the rarefied atmosphere of the Capitol Dome, the vernacular can get a little colorful. And third, when did the Democrats turn into the GOP?? For some of the Elephant's more intellectually disconnected, southern-fried 'good ol boys' to conceive an example of legislative lip-diddling as endlessly risible as this would be effortlessly predictable. For those who follow the Donkey to claim its parentage is stupefying.
We already have the means to control 'indecency'; A remote. And the 'majority of the people' should not be required to tolerate an endless diet of G-rated dialog just because a handful of parents are too lazy and stupid to master its operation.
If this truly is the most vital issue our Representatives can find on which to invest their energies, it's a relief to know the forthcoming elections will give 'the majority' a chance to relieve them of the burden.
No comments:
Post a Comment