Support NeoGAF

[Mason]

Hey, the Defence Department needs to get their funding from somewhere.

Btw, isn't this FCC bill against the nature of capitalism? Damn communists.

We call it the Defense Department over here, Hammy.

 

[Phoenix]

What happened to the First Amendment?

Someone with sanity decided it didn't apply to EVERYTHING. Having XXX donkey porn come on after Pokemon should not have First Amendment protection.

 

[Phoenix]

Sigh. I'm heavily involved with college radio (WXDU-Durham) and can see that absolutely no good is going to come of this. Our station would probably be shut down were we to receive a single $27,500 indecency fine; the thought of being hit with a $275,000 fine because a naughty word is accidentally broadcast is simply ludicrous.

Hopefully these fuckers will come to their senses - or will backpeddle after political backlash - and bring things back down to the realm of the sane. Meanwhile, I hope poor old 'XDU survives the experience.

FnordChan

What they SHOULD do is similar to speeding fines on the Autobahn, develop a system that scales with how much money the studio has. Fox can afford to pop a boob on the superbown for 275k, while a college station that lets 'shit' slip once is likely going declare bankruptcy the next day.

 

[Wolfy]

Hahah. Doesn't pokemon hint at animal porn!?

 

[Rorschach]

It's great to know that a government organization can be openly paid off with no consequences whatsoever.

 

[FnordChan]

What they SHOULD do is similar to speeding fines on the Autobahn, develop a system that scales with how much money the studio has. Fox can afford to pop a boob on the superbown for 275k, while a college station that lets 'shit' slip once is likely going declare bankruptcy the next day.

Granted, that would be a somewhat more tolerable alternative to what the Senate just passed, if only to keep, say, small community radio stations from being obliterated by a single case of indecency. At the same time, even big companies like Fox are going to be afraid of $275,000 fines, which is going to cause them to become paranoid about what they broadcast. A $27,500 fine for broadcasting an indecency is reasonable while still enforcing the law; a $275,000 fine is madness, and encourages a level of self-censorship that limits free speech.

FnordChan

 

[shoplifter]

Keep in mind that the fine is for EACH station which broadcast said 'indecent' word was on.

You're on 100 stations? $27.5 million please. For the performer as well if the FCC decides to do so.

 

[sc0la]

Keep in mind that the fine is for EACH station which broadcast said 'indecent' word was on.

You're on 100 stations? $27.5 million please. For the performer as well if the FCC decides to do so.

Wouldn't that still be capped at 3million dollar a day limit?

 

[shoplifter]

Wouldn't that still be capped at 3million dollar a day limit?

I dunno, probably for the performer, but they could fine each individual station up to 3mil a day (at the $275k per) would be my guess.

 

[Belfast]

So now the country's being run by a fucking quasi-religious cult?

Hasn't it always?

 

[Azih]

John Breaux for President!

 

[Evolution VIII]

You guys are ridiculous. Free speech isn't in danger of this bill passing. All the bill is doing is telling broadcasters that they have to react responsibly with the public airwaves, which doesn't belong to Howard Stern, or Fox, or any other broadcasting channel, but belongs to all of us.

 

[G4life98]

they only way the fcc can really be stopped is if a performer brings a lawsuit against them and and that way the fcc wouldnt be able to use their mafia like tactics of holding liscences hostage.

 

[kitchenmotors]

What I find funny is the start of all this, Janet Jackson, has yet to be fined. But Howard has been fined recently for shows from like 3 years ago. It's insane.

Parents should regulate what is heard or seen on the tv/radio, not the government. I'm not a child, I'm a 22 year old adult and quite frankly, it disgusts me that the government also has to regulate what I want to watch or listen to.

 

[Evolution VIII]

What I find funny is the start of all this, Janet Jackson, has yet to be fined. But Howard has been fined recently for shows from like 3 years ago. It's insane.

You do realize that the FCC has been going after Howard Stern way before the Janet Jackson incident, right?

What I find really stupid is that Howard Stern was a fervent Bush supporter up until the FCC decided to step up the pressure on him. Now he thinks that Bush and the "religious right" are out to get him. What an arrogant fool. I still listen to show, but damn don't I get tired of his mythical political rhetoric.

Parents should regulate what is heard or seen on the tv/radio, not the government. I'm not a child, I'm a 22 year old adult and quite frankly, it disgusts me that the government also has to regulate what I want to watch or listen to.

The government regulates the airwaves because they belong to the public, not to corporations. You don't see much regulation on cable or satellite because these are services that consumers pay for and therefore are not subject to the same scrutiny as broadcast TV and radio.

 

[CaptainABAB]

You know what I want to see?

I want the FCC to sue the brother of Pat Tillman for saying Fuck several times in his speech during the funeral - it was broadcast on ESPN after all.

Or how about when an athlete mutters some swear after getting poked in the eye.

Or how about suing someone for doing or saying something when they don't even know they are on live TV. Let's go after Bono, someone who is trying to help with debt relief in Africa.

Then the absurdity of this will become crystal clear.

 

[Evolution VIII]

You know what I want to see?

I want the FCC to sue the brother of Pat Tillman for saying Fuck several times in his speech during the funeral - it was broadcast on ESPN after all.

Or how about when an athlete mutters some swear after getting poked in the eye.

Or how about suing someone for doing or saying something when they don't even know they are on live TV. Let's go after Bono, someone who is trying to help with debt relief in Africa.

Then the absurdity of this will become crystal clear.

They've already ruled on those. They were using the word "fuck" as an adjective in showing emotion, not as in the verbal form which describes sexual acts.

 

[Killthee]

You know what I want to see?

I want the FCC to sue the brother of Pat Tillman for saying Fuck several times in his speech during the funeral - it was broadcast on ESPN after all.

Or how about when an athlete mutters some swear after getting poked in the eye.

Or how about suing someone for doing or saying something when they don't even know they are on live TV. Let's go after Bono, someone who is trying to help with debt relief in Africa.

Then the absurdity of this will become crystal clear.

I believe the FCC has to receive a certain amount of complaints before they can start an investigation.

 

[kitchenmotors]

I believe the FCC has to receive a certain amount of complaints before they can start an investigation.

500,000 complaints for Janet Jackson and no investigation that lead to anything. Try again.

 

[RevenantKioku]

Sigh. I don't want to come back to the states.

 

[explodet]

First Degree Murder: 43
Second Degree Murder: 33
Air Piracy: 38

*whistles*

Now when you refer to Air Piracy, are we talking about Don Karnage/"Tailspin" type Air Pirates?

 

[Evolution VIII]

500,000 complaints for Janet Jackson and no investigation that lead to anything. Try again.

I don't think they will fine Janet Jackson, but CBS was hit with a fine for the mishap.

 

[FnordChan]

They've already ruled on those. They were using the word "fuck" as an adjective in showing emotion, not as in the verbal form which describes sexual acts.

Which makes it an Indecency, not an Obscenity, according to current guidelines. Of course, the rules are vague and enforcement varies according to whim; I can't say that I'd like to see folks nailed to the wall for saying "fuck".

Now when you refer to Air Piracy, are we talking about Don Karnage/"Tailspin" type Air Pirates?

The first thing I think of is Porco Rosso, but I believe the Feds are thinking more along the lines of traditional hijacking.

FnordChan

 

[explodet]

Dang, I keep meaning to see Porco Rosso.

*continues to watch skin movies on Canadian TV on Friday nights*

 

[FnordChan]

Dang, I keep meaning to see Porco Rosso.

It's due out in Region 1 sometime this fall. If you have any love of air piracy whatsoever, you owe it to yourself to go watch it as soon as humanly possible. Porco Rosso is, in fact, even better than Canadian broadcast skin flicks. I should also mention that Porco Rosso is in no way Indecent or Obscene.

FnordChan, supporting the prurient interest

 

[CaptainABAB]

They've already ruled on those. They were using the word "fuck" as an adjective in showing emotion, not as in the verbal form which describes sexual acts.

Don't be so sure.....

FCC Chairman wants to overturn decision on Bono's expletive
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/14/fcc.obscenity.ap/

'The FCC's enforcement bureau ruled in October that the comment was not indecent or obscene because Bono used the word as an adjective, not to describe a sexual act. "The performer used the word ... as an adjective or expletive to emphasize an exclamation," the bureau said.

Powell circulated a proposed ruling to the four other commissioners on Tuesday. He needs the votes of two of the four to overturn the decision. "



FCC: Bono Expletive Definitely Profane
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,114640,00.html

"The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday overruled its staff and declared that an expletive uttered by rock star Bono on NBC last year was both indecent and profane. The agency made it clear that virtually any use of the F-word was inappropriate for over-the-air radio and television."

 

[MASB]

I haven't heard it yet personally, but the first act of a few weeks ago episode of "This American Life" covered similar FCC things. TAL is always good radio for me.

You can check out the stream here
http://www.thislife.org/ra/267.ram

EDIT: there is a 6 minute prologue to get past. Which oddly enough I think contains some mario music in it. Though I could be confusing it with some ballet that is lodged in the back of my head, it reminds me of the water music from SMB3.



LOL, as always Fnord, you are awesome

The music was from the Nutcracker Suite.

 

[Minotauro]

All the bill is doing is telling broadcasters that they have to react responsibly with the public airwaves, which doesn't belong to Howard Stern, or Fox, or any other broadcasting channel, but belongs to all of us.

Exactly. And WE should be the ones making the decisions regarding what is and isn't appropriate for broadcast on those airwaves. This can be done in a very simple way: by letting the market dictate who succeeds and who fails. If Howard Stern wants to talk about rim-jobbing dogs and his audience wants to hear it, what's the problem? Why should the FCC dictate the standards?

I like how conservatives are all about leaving the market alone and allowing it to fix itself but at the same time are for censoring speech they have some animosity toward.

 

[etiolate]

Other amendments tacked onto the bill: One suspends the FCC's June 2 ownership revisions

I find this very interesting. If this is the bill I am thinking of, it's the one that allowed the radio megacorps to buy up more stations in markets. This was back when those companies and the FCC were buddy-buddy, because of the RIAA's witch hunt for music downloaders. Now the FCC is on it's own witch hunt and they yanked back those privileges. Maybe that will piss of the record companies that want increased control over what is being played/heard and the FCC will have some more enemies that don't rely on licenses?

They've already ruled on those. They were using the word "fuck" as an adjective in showing emotion, not as in the verbal form which describes sexual acts.

That's fucking hilarious.