That's where the gripe is with the FCC. They hold the power of censure over indecency on the airwaves. However, there are no hard and fast standards for said indecency - it's a completely subjective process driven largely by consumer complaints.
Quote the FCC:
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/oip/FAQ.html#TheLaw
bas[/gold wrote:
tards]
What are the statutes and rules regarding the broadcast of obscene, indecent, and profane programming?
Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1464, prohibits the utterance of “any obscene, indecent or profane language by means of radio communication.†Consistent with a subsequent statute and court case, the Commission's rules prohibit the broadcast of indecent material during the period of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. FCC decisions also prohibit the broadcast of profane material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. Civil enforcement of these requirements rests with the FCC, and is an important part of the FCC's overall responsibilities. At the same time, the FCC must be mindful of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 326 of the Communications Act, which prohibit the FCC from censoring program material, or interfering with broadcasters' free speech rights.
What makes material “obscene?â€
Obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and broadcasters are prohibited, by statute and regulation, from airing obscene programming at any time. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, to be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test: (1) an average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (i.e., material having a tendency to excite lustful thoughts); (2) the material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and (3) the material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The Supreme Court has indicated that this test is designed to cover hard-core pornography.
What makes material “indecent?â€
Indecent material contains sexual or excretory material that does not rise to the level of obscenity. For this reason, the courts have held that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be banned entirely. It may, however, be restricted to avoid its broadcast during times of the day when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. The FCC has determined, with the approval of the courts, that there is a reasonable risk that children will be in the audience from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., local time. Therefore, the FCC prohibits station licensees from broadcasting indecent material during that period.
Material is indecent if, in context, it depicts or describes sexual or excretory organs or activities in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium. In each case, the FCC must determine whether the material describes or depicts sexual or excretory organs or activities and, if so, whether the material is “patently offensive.â€
In our assessment of whether material is “patently offensive,†context is critical. The FCC looks at three primary factors when analyzing broadcast material: (1) whether the description or depiction is explicit or graphic; (2) whether the material dwells on or repeats at length descriptions or depictions of sexual or excretory organs; and (3) whether the material appears to pander or is used to titillate or shock. No single factor is determinative. The FCC weighs and balances these factors because each case presents its own mix of these, and possibly other, factors.
What makes material “profane?â€
“Profane language†includes those words that are so highly offensive that their mere utterance in the context presented may, in legal terms, amount to a “nuisance.†In its Golden Globe Awards Order the FCC warned broadcasters that, depending on the context, it would consider the “F-Word†and those words (or variants thereof) that are as highly offensive as the “F-Word†to be “profane language†that cannot be broadcast between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.
Emphasis added where text is bold and underlined. These bullsh[gold]it wishy-washy terms create a subjective set of criteria for enforcement. Likewise, the penalties assessed by the FCC follow no particular rhyme or reason. For all I know they sit around a giant table while members of the board call out bigger and bigger penalties, each of them ************ furiously all the while. When they reach ****** they use that number for the fine. Fuc[gold][/gold]king Washington.
The FCC holds no regulatory power over movies, cable television, or the internet. They're limited to regulating broadcast media, though they would probably
love to have their hands in everything else. More responsibility means more fines, fines mean money, money means power in DC.
Another amusing thing to consider. The FCC reacts to consumer complaints, right? In truth the FCC reacts mostly to complaints from one specific group: the
Parents Television Council.
The PTC website has a handy page set up that dispatches a form-letter complaint to the FCC. If you're offended by something, just sign on, fill out a couple of fields, and click 'submit'. The PTC acts a lot like a political action committee, asking their member base to protest various shows or activities, or having large groups of them complain about a given program whether or not they actually saw it themselves. This derails the entire "public complaint" process.
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=61786
Quote:
According to an FCC analysis obtained by Mediaweek, over 99 percent of indecency complaints filed before the FCC in 2003 came from a single interest group, the Parents Television Council (PTC).
In February 2004, a PTC campaign launched against one TV episode accounted for 88 percent of the total complaints the FCC received that month. (1)
...
(1) On its website, the PTC claimed that its members sent 12,801 complaints to the FCC regarding that TV program. In the same month, the FCC reported receiving a total of 14,480 complaints.
The whole process is stupid.
![Smiley: glare](//zam.zamimg.com/i/smilies/glare.gif)