.jpg)
By Amanda Ruggeri
Posted April 28, 2009
Seven years after Cher swore on live television and more than 30 years after it last made a ruling on broadcast indecency, the Supreme Court today upheld the federal government's right to crack down on TV networks' airing of expletives. But it stopped short of ruling on a separate challenge as to whether the regulations infringed the First Amendment, leaving the decision to a lower court—and frustrating free-speech advocates.
USN.load('Loomia');
The Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 for the Federal Communications Commission's right to regulate even "fleeting expletives," the commission's shorthand that describes when a curse word is suddenly blurted out on live television. Those weren't treated as indecent until the FCC changed its policy in 2004 as part of a crackdown triggered by Janet Jackson's momentary partial nudity at the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show.
The case that came before the Supreme Court today began after incidents in which Cher swore on live television in 2002 and Nicole Richie did the same in 2003, both of which brought reprimands from the FCC. Although the FCC didn't fine the Fox TV network for airing the broadcasts, it declared that the actions were offensive. Fox challenged the commission's decision. Now, in explaining the court's decision to back the FCC's regulations, Justice Antonin Scalia called the commission's policy "neither arbitrary nor capricious," overturning a previous ruling made by a New York federal appeals court.
Posted April 28, 2009
Seven years after Cher swore on live television and more than 30 years after it last made a ruling on broadcast indecency, the Supreme Court today upheld the federal government's right to crack down on TV networks' airing of expletives. But it stopped short of ruling on a separate challenge as to whether the regulations infringed the First Amendment, leaving the decision to a lower court—and frustrating free-speech advocates.
USN.load('Loomia');
The Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 for the Federal Communications Commission's right to regulate even "fleeting expletives," the commission's shorthand that describes when a curse word is suddenly blurted out on live television. Those weren't treated as indecent until the FCC changed its policy in 2004 as part of a crackdown triggered by Janet Jackson's momentary partial nudity at the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show.
The case that came before the Supreme Court today began after incidents in which Cher swore on live television in 2002 and Nicole Richie did the same in 2003, both of which brought reprimands from the FCC. Although the FCC didn't fine the Fox TV network for airing the broadcasts, it declared that the actions were offensive. Fox challenged the commission's decision. Now, in explaining the court's decision to back the FCC's regulations, Justice Antonin Scalia called the commission's policy "neither arbitrary nor capricious," overturning a previous ruling made by a New York federal appeals court.
1 comment:
This is a no brainer...If you wanna hear swearing and the F Bombs go in to any grade school boys rest room at recess...I am glad the Networks are having to keep it clean, in fact I wouldn't mind every one, including "Rap" music cleaning it up a bit..How about EVERYONE being more civil and word conscience..Remember when we didn't swear in front of women? and children?...
Post a Comment