Skip to comments.FCC delays decision on allowing more nudity and cursing on TV
Posted on 07/15/2013 3:27:00 PM PDT by jazusamo
Regulators are extending the comment period on a controversial proposal to ease restrictions on cursing and nonsexual nudity over public airwaves.
The action drew fire Monday from opponents of the idea, who have called upon the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to scrap the plan and salvage the final vestiges of family-friendly broadcasting.
Back in April, the FCC put out a call for feedback on a plan to focus on the most egregious cases of indecency. If adopted, the less stringent regulations would reflect a shift from George W. Bush-era policies of pursuing penalties for isolated infractions on broadcast television.
The FCC is soliciting comments on how to handle infrequent swearing and instances of nudity that are not overtly sexual.
There has been no shortage of feedback. The FCC has been flooded with more than 100,000 submissions, the vast majority from opponents of the proposed action.
Private citizens and traditional values argue there is already too much smut on television, and say theres plenty of room for more adult entertainment on cable, the Internet and satellite radio.
But the networks contend that times have changed, and say their right to free speech is violated when they are penalized for broadcasting material that has become ubiquitous in other forms of entertainment.
In May, the FCC announced it was extending the comment period, with the final submissions to be filed no later than this Thursday.
College Broadcasters, Inc. (CBI), which represents students involved in radio and television, requested a second extension on July 1, noting the vast number of comments filed. CBI also cited the complexity of the proposal and its own wherewithal to respond, given a limited budget and a summer staffing shortage.
The FCC agreed to extend the comment deadline until August 2.
We recognize the importance of affording all interested parties sufficient time to review the comments in the Docket and to prepare their reply comments, the FCC said. We also respect the interest of the public in having sufficient time for review and consideration of the various positions and concerns.
The announcement drew swift rebuke Monday from the group Morality in Media, which accused the FCC of moving the goal posts in deference to the broadcast industry.
What the FCC needs is commissioners who take their jobs seriously and enforce the duly passed law of Congress, which prohibits indecency and profanity on the public airwaves, the group said in a written statement.
The group, as part of a coalition of 70 other organizations, has called upon the Senate to block the confirmation of Tom Wheeler, President Obamas nominee to head the FCC, until he pledges to enforce the decency regulations now on the books.
It seem the FCC and the smut providers are not getting the feedback they desire.
I think it is silly for the Government to be involved in this anyway. If the parents did their job then it would be a mute point.
If you don’t want this stuff on TV, throw your set away. They play every conceivable sort of game to get around the already very lax rules. Has anyone watched the phony “reality” series “Naked and Afraid?” It’s just a cutesy way to show virtually naked people in prime time TV. Of course after a few days of getting mud-caked and nasty dirty the participants lose any sex appeal they may have originally had IMO.
But nudity is visual, so muting the TV won't make a difference. ;-)
Oh %#$#! What a bunch of %&#!%$ they are! %$#&!!!
They need to spend more time alone with the evidence before coming to a decision.
If Sofia Vergarra shows up neked I ain’t complaining
“Listen? Can you smell that?”
There should be a limit to what is shown on TV. If it’s anything goes, the only way a parent can “do their job” as you say is to never be able to watch TV. The FCC does have a place in a civilized society.
I respect “free speech”, but as far as nudity, vulgarity and sexual innuendo and sexual conduct over the public airwaves, I don’t think present restrictions go far enough, in many cases, in terms of the time of the day/night that some things are allowed to be broadcast - whether the content is part of a “show” or an advertisement (a really simple - and by far NOT the biggest example: 6 year olds at 7PM don’t need to be asking mommy “what’s Viagra”).
The smut producers seem to want it all and it's got nothing to do with just kids, there are people of all ages that would like to see smut free family entertainment over public airways on TV.
“I think it is silly for the Government to be involved in this anyway. If the parents did their job then it would be a mute point.”
anymore, many parents can only “do their job” by NOT letting their kids watch TV, period, unless the parents change the channels and the kids are unable to change the channels on their own
even the Disney and “Nick” channels are smutty today, with pre-teens and teens reaching roles on screen that seemed risque for adults in my youth - everything is sex, sex, sex under a thin venneer (a “cover”) of “appropriate” activity
childrens’ innocence is being stolen, by the media arts, and its importance in their development (recognizing the full meaning of “immature”) is being ignored
the rates of out-of-wedlock births and single moms, divorce, “living together” instead of marriage and other factors are all way up and their increase has followed the increase in “adult” entertainment at earlier and earlier times, and descending into younger and younger ages over the the public airwaves
the media arts like to say they are only “reflecting” society’s standards - that’s a half truth that amounts to a lie - they acknowledge that “advertizing and promotion work”, its the heart of selling what they do and they know it works so well ‘cause they’ll admit that NOT advertizing smoking has helped reduce the number of people who smoke;
so what they promote - push - on the airwaves, IS what THEY are selling, and THEY have helped to push and create the “changing standards” they want to claim they have nothing to do with - they had a lot to do with the changing moral standards, not by “following” but by leading in a not good way
Besides, when you’re talking mutes are moot. ;-)
I remember my little brother getting all excited by the “Brief Nudity” parental warning preceeding some episodes of NYPD Blue.
I always ridiculed him for waiting and watching oh-so-patiently...only to be disappointed in being shown Andy Cipowitz’s ass at the end of the episode.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.