President Bush said some surprisingly sensible things in conjunction with signing the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005 yesterday, reminding parents that they have primary responsibility for what their children watch on television.
The Act increases broadcaster liability for indecency by a factor of ten, raising fines up to $325,000 per indecency infraction, defined by the Federal Communications Commission as sexual or excretory content of a "patently offensive nature" between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.
The new law comes two and a half years after Nipplegate rocked the 2004 Super Bowl. The Act does not include earlier provisions that would have allowed individual performers to be fined for infractions, broadcast license suspension after three offenses, and did not bring cable and satellite broadcasts under the FCC's purview.
Speaking to a crowd of assembled legislators and dignitaries including FCC Chairman and decency crusader Kevin Martin, Bush said, "Every day our nation's parents strive to raise their children in a culture that too often produces coarse, vulgar and obscene entertainment."
"In our free society," he continued, "parents have the final responsibility over the television shows that their children watch, or the websites they visit, or the music they listen to. That's a responsibility of moms and dads all across the country, to make sure their children are listening to or watching the right kind of programming."
This question of ultimate responsibility is central to the legal and philosophical debate going on around the country over broadcast standards and the role of government in enforcing them. The debate may be coming to a head as the major networks and their affiliates went to court in April seeking to overturn a new round of indecency penalties proposed by the FCC in March, including a record $3.3 million sanction against the CBS teen drama Without a Trace.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Margaret Romao Toigo
I saw that episode of Without a Trace (which is more of a detective show than a teen drama, BTW), and it was pretty racy for network television, but it aired at 10pm EST, which falls outside of the 6am-10pm restriction.
2 - Dave Nalle
Remind me. Is the PTC the big left-wing decency group or another right wing one?
Dave
3 - Jet in Columbus
Well at one time they were so left wing that they went around in a little circle and now their right wing... stay tuned for further buletins...
4 - Jet in Columbus
You know Eric, I'm old enough to remember a time when we had prayer in public schools. In 2nd grade I was made to stand in the corner for half an hour becaue I refused to recite the Lord's Prayer correctly.
You see my teacher's version was "Forgive our trespasses as we would forgive those who trespass against us." but being a staunch Presbyterian, even at that age, our version was "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"
They won't be happy with just Broadcast TV Eric I promise you that; Cable's next, then Satelite radio, then Newsprint articles, this very site, then what books are available in the public library. and ultimately what version of the bible is legal to teach in churches.
You may think I'm overly exageratedly worried and alarmist, but I lived through it, I've suffered the persecution of being gay in the 60s and 70s when it was legal to be arrested for it. I loved through the days when Anita Bryant made the papers and TV news at least once a week, and Falwells "JESUS FIRST" pins began appearing on suits.
Like it was in the late 70s and the Reagan 80s, unless we stand up and say "Stop them here, and let them go no further" the day is coming.
Mark my words
Solus mei sententia
Jet
5 - Eric Olsen
the rules haven't changed Jet, just the penalties. I agree we must remain vigilant, but there are any number of reasons why your concerns about censorship won't come to fruition. You give those who oppose free speech far too much credit and power.
Margaret, I guess the show aired some places before 10pm - that's exactly the issue.
6 - Jet in Columbus
Your right Eric, they're trying to use the excuse on the technicality that it was broadcast by satelite at 10PM eastern to their affiliates which would be 7PM Pacific or even early afternoon in Hawaii. People aren't supposed to be able to get those broadcasts, but they still use it as an excuse. Can you imagine our "restricted to family programming hours" if they extended to 10PM Honolulu time?
Solus mei sententia
Jet
7 - Peter J
Eric,
Bush spoke;
"In our free society," he continued, "parents have the final responsibility over the television shows that their children watch, or the websites they visit, or the music they listen to. That's a responsibility of moms and dads all across the country, to make sure their children are listening to or watching the right kind of programming."
This I agree with 100%. I've seen Saturday morning cartoons which, had I the resposibility of young children, I would not allow them to watch! I am not in the least bit prudish but I would be embarrassed to sit and watch these cartoons with them. Commercials, day or night, border on soft porn.
But, this is totally the parents responsibility, no one elses. It's a very simple solution, without the government o any one else becoming involved. Now, this is the hard part. What these cronic piss-ants need to do is program all of the channels to History, Geography, Animal Planet,any which will teach as well as entertain. Purchase or rent videos in the same vein, it is up totally to parents what and who they allow in their homes.Would these poor fools have a known child rapist babysit their children then absolve themselves of all responsibility because they
It is the business of no one else who or what I,as an adult allow in my home. It is not the business of the Government to moniter my actions. I am not willing to give up one more Right simply to placate a bunch of tounge clucking moralists. As I've always said, if you don't like it,turn it off, change the channel, whatever!
It always amazed me that when Howard Stern was on publc airways his biggest critics knew more about the comings and goings of the show than myself, who was a casual listner while driving! If I had a child in the car I certainly would not have put that station on.
WE do not need any more laws or regulations telling us how to conduct our lives.
Like Bush said, it is a free society in which it is the final responsibility of moms and dads to make sure their children are listening to or watching the right kind of programming!
Highlight the words 'free' and 'final'.
no where in the middle do I see the word government!
8 - Jet in Columbus
Oh yeah right Peter good idea, with that much shielding this nation's kids will really be prepared for the real world.
As it is America, is falling flat on it's face in the sciences because the kids are being taught not to believe in it by the Intelligent design nuts.
Next they'll be outlawing hospitals and emegency rooms because it's God's will if you have a disease or accident.
I cover a lot of this ground in my article Obscenity and the FCC: The TV Networks Should Follow Howard Stern’s Lead
Solus mei sententia
Jet
9 - Peter J
Jet,,,Are we cofused together??Did I somehow come off in favor of censorship?
My point was for government to keep out of my livingroom. It's up to PARENTS to police their own kids! Long story short.
10 - Jet in Columbus
Sorry I saw red when you said you agreed 100 percent with Bush, I don't know what confused me.
11 - Peter J
Looking back at it I probably should have chosen better wording, sorry 'bout that!
12 - Jet in Columbus
Check out the link in comment 8 and you'll see where I'm coming from
13 - Arch Conservative
"Oh yeah right Peter good idea, with that much shielding this nation's kids will really be prepared for the real world.
"As it is America, is falling flat on it's face in the sciences because the kids are being taught not to believe in it by the Intelligent design nuts."
Exsqueeze me? It's the right's fault our kids aren't getting a decent education?
HOw about the left replacing traditional schooling (reading, writing, arithmetic) with all their touchy feel bullshit. It is the left that wants to stop teaching our kids the basics and start teaching them not to lover everyone and have everyone love them. It's the loons on ther left who even want to get rid of the grading systems in some school because it "hurt's the self esteem of some students" wah wah wah.......god forbid students actually have to study more to do better...god forbid the kids are allowed to know that there are intellectual disparities among them....no we have to treat every kid as if he is a genius and make him believe he is one.... yeah these leftist goons are really teaching our kids about the real world..........
it's also the leftist nea and teacher's unions that have a stranglehold on all that goes on in our public schools... they demand that we keep throing money at a failing public education system and they're so powerful that we do......
the catholic school system spends less money per pupil and yet their students on avaerage perform better on standardized tests.........
14 - Clavos
the catholic school system spends less money per pupil and yet their students on avaerage perform better on standardized tests.........
In fact, pretty much ANY church sponsored school, even the much-reviled Christian academies do a better job of teaching the three Rs for less money than the government monopoly schools.
Private academies, though more costly, have always been better than public schools.
Why do they all do better? They demand and get better qualified teachers. They instill discipline in the students, they keep score in the form of real (not on the curve) grades, and they don't worry about the touchy-feely crap.
Tuition costs prevent a lot of parents from choosing these schools for their kids, though many (especially the poorest, whose public schools are usually the worst) would like to.
A good school voucher system, which has been proposed a number of times, would go a long way to improving public schools by forcing them to compete. Unfortunately, the teachers unions are adamantly opposed to this idea. They couch their opposition in noble terms, but it really boils down to their fear of competition and of losing their grip on the teaching profession.
And BTW, America has allegedly been "falling flat on its face in the teaching of science" since before the Russkies put up Sputnik in 1957, yet our science and engineering schools are full of foreign students...wonder why?
15 - Jet in Columbus
You're constant misinformed right-wing spam can be so cute at times...to bad this isn't one fo them.
16 - Clavos
Trenchant, hard-hitting rebuttal there, Jet.
17 - Jet in Columbus
It makes about as much sense as anything you've posted, and is a lot less wordy
18 - Clavos
Uh huh....
19 - Jet in Columbus
Trenchant, hard-hitting rebuttal there,Clavos
20 - Clavos
You haven't said anything to me that needs rebutting, Jet.
21 - Jet in Columbus
Nor have you, by the way we've joined forces-you and I-to fight the kiddie porn spam on fresh comments, so that's something.
We are the worllllllld
We are the chillllldren
22 - Clavos
Word, Dude.
23 - Eric Olsen
I don't think broadcast decency standards have a lot to do with educational attainment, but a large part of why the public school educated score lower than private schools is that the public schools are required (to attempt) to teach everyone whereas private schools can pick and choose and have more latitude in terms of restrictions and enforcement, etc.
I thik it's fine for the government to have braodcast standards, but they need to be enforced fairly and uniformly, which they have not been in the past.
24 - Jet in Columbus
FINALLY an intelligent voice!
25 - Arch Conservative
The real reason that priavte, especially catholic, schools do better than publiv schools is as clavos pointed out. They have much better teachers, the teach actual subjects ike math, science, language rather than touchy feely bullshit that is the standard fare in public schools, they expect more from their students and they know how to get more from their students.
It has nothing to do with slective admission we're talking about K-12 here not medical school. At most catholic schools the main consideration is wether or not tuition can be afforded.
It's nice to see that Jet is completely ignorant on this issue and instead of actually responding to any of the things clavos and I have said with reasoned counterpoints he says
"You're constant misinformed right-wing spam can be so cute at times...to bad this isn't one fo them."
Why don't you follow Eric Olsen's example on how to correctly rrespond to someone you disagree with Jet. He clearly laid out the reasons why he disagrees with Clavos and I, directly addressing the very points we brought up.
Your post was just a waste of space.
You're getting to be almost as bad as MCH Jet....and that's company no one wants to keep.