Freespeech is free as long as it is what Bush wants to hear

[sweepea436]

Originally posted by aREDSKIN

I disagree. These are not new laws or guidelines as you suggest.

This is just more stringent enforcement of existing laws. Just because someone in authority dosen't enforce something that's against the current law dosen't make the behavoir allowable. He cannot change what he said and therefore Clear channel must pay the price for his "overstepping" the bounds of decency as per the current laws. The faults lies with prior FCC authorities who fail to act in the interests of the public by not enforcing the laws. Bubba the love Sponge was anothe CC employee who was fined heavily for offensive speech made months ago. CC & HS need to find a "statute of limitations" to enjoin the FCC from past acts of offensivness.

Ok, I know he has stepped over the line before. Obviously, he's been fined throughout his career. But the things he did in "poor taste" we'll call it, are not limited to his show. I've seen and heard it in other mediums. I've never seen fines dropped on other shows with the frequency they are on his. I'm not a Stern advocate, I can get my "morally baseless" entertainment anywhere else I look. My whole point is that if you are going to crack down - do it to everybody not just Stern and.....that Spongebob guy. Fine Oprah, fine Seacrest. I think "Maury"and "Ricki" are more offensive than radio show I've listened to. Again - this is all my opinion. I don't claim to be an subject matter expert......

[JimboDaMan]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

g, I dont doubt it. But I equate it this way.

I drive to work on an interstate and drive 75 MPH in a 65 zone. Everyday I pass by a trooper who doesnt pull me over. One day he does. It's a valid stop because I was breaking the law. Doesnt matter that he ignored it other days. Now you will probably say that he cant charge me for the day I did it before, and while true, it's different. IE, If I embezzle money from a company, I can be charged with ALL of the back violations, not just the most recent ones.

Good illustration, K. But in this example, suppose the sign simply said "Don't speed". After years of driving at a certain speed, could it suddenly be declared illegal?

The FCC has never clearly defined what "indecency" is. When they do, I suspect I will disagree with it. But at least the guidelines will be clear. Stern's idea of indecency is clearly different from yours and mine. But he also, unquestionably, takes steps to try to remain within the bounds. Much of the problem is in the interperatation.

I suspect the FCC regs as written would not pass a concerted legal challenge. The last time Stern was fined, he tried to take the case to court. The FCC applied pressure to Infinity by holding up approval of station licensing and acquisitions, and Infinity caved. It'll be interesting to see what happens if this gets to court.

[chiefhogskin48]

What's being said and done on television and radio in the last few years has been a steady, gradual degeneration of deceny standards. In law, community standards are valid, objective measures. Saying "fu(kface" on TV is not decent, and children should not be exposed to such. It's amazing that simply watching cable with my 5 yr old nephew can be a dangerous thing. Few parents want to answer the question "Mommy, what does b!tch mean?" But I've seen these things happen over and over. Imagine the children watching the Super Bowl halftime show. Would any reasonable parent want their children exposed to that?

This isn't a matter of left or right. It's a matter of common decency on the airwaves.

I remember just 5-10 years ago, networks couldn't get away with saying ass, b!tch, crap, etc. Also, networks do a horrible job "bleeping out" profanity on those "reality" shows.