The FCC is one scary organization

Status
Not open for further replies.
Howard Stern's biggest gripe is that Clear Channel kicked him off. Boohoo! Howard Stern has the right to say whatever he wants and the FCC should probably stay out of it, but Clear Channel has the right to bounce him anytime they want. The right to say what you want does not equal the right to broadcast it using someone else's equipment.
Click to expand...
Unless there is a contractual agreement to those ends.

If there was no contract, if he violated his contract or if the contract allowed for cancellation for whatever reason that is valid in this instance by Clear Channel, then you are absolutely correct.
 
"Tim? I can not force publication of my views on any one's press? Am I allowed to purchase the use of it? Or do I have to buy my own press?"

No, you can't force anyone to print something for you. How could you? On the other hand, yes, of course you can purchase the use of someone's press as the owner sees fit. Even still, he does not have to allow you to print anything you want. You may certainly buy your own press and print anything you want with it.

I agree that the founding fathers would have wanted even inconceivable methods of communication to be free. On the other hand, it would be interesting indeed to see what they would have to say about communications involving a channel owned by the people themselves.

I disagree, Dischord, that my argument is circular, for the simple reason that the people own the airwaves independent of government declarations, just as the air we breathe cannot be owned by anyone in particular. This is similar reasoning to the concept that the Bill of Rights merely enumerates rights granted by divine authority (if you will) but does not itself grant them.

In any event, I don't want to become known as a question-mark-disturber. Semantics aside, I'm sure I mostly agree philosophically with all who have posted here so far. And no, I most certainly do not agree with the AWB.

Tim
 
Clear channel only dropped Stern so that they could look better in the House committee meetings.

Personally I dislike Howard Stern, but I don't think the FCC should be regulating content at all. I don't like lots of things, doesn't make it right for the government to squash them.
 
I have been in the Wireless business now for 8 years. There are allot of things to complain about, but the FCC is not one of them in my book. Without the FCC we would have a mess like no one here could even imagine. Keeping our radio spectrum allocated properly is a big job. The FCC has done a decent job of keeping the wireless industry working smoothly without the FCC people could put up towers wherever they wanted. IT would be a huge mess!!!! Bottom line is the FCC is doing more harm then good. I have a hard time feeling to terrible sorry for Howard Stern.

I can understand why people get upset when the FCC fines someone for saying something that the FCC believes is profane. That sounds allot like censorship. It seems to me if you want to get mad about censorship you should get mad about the Campaign Finance Fiasco. That is the worst case of censorship I have ever seen.
 
Howard states that the biggest problem is not being fined, it's that you can't fight what the FCC deems inappropriate. When they tried taking them to court over a fine a few years ago they halted their process of buying/selling new stations, licenses, etc..

It's big goverment bullying people/companies to conform or they'll ruin your life/business. The other problem is that they don't spell out what is inappropriate,
besides they "seven bad words". If you piss the goverment off they'll find something.
 
Radio Spectrum is NOT Public Property

Sorry - As a HAM radio operator I have to disagree with the free speech folks on this one . . .

The Electromagnetic Spectrum is not free public domain. When a person or station receives a license to operate, a contract is agreed to with our government. Part of that contract is the profanity restrictions. If a licensee breaks that portion (or any other portion) of the contract with the government, they can be sanctioned.

JPM
 
"Radio Spectrum is NOT Public Property "

My earlier comments about the radio spectrum being a divine gift notwithstanding, the Communications Act of 1934 bans private ownership of the airwaves.

Tim
 
Howard Stern, Radio, Cable TV, Rap Muzak, & all the Media is an open sewer and desparately needs to be cleaned up.

Hooray for the FCC! Fine them out of existance!

Boo! To the Nimrods who don't see anything wrong with the Mass Media the way it has been for the last several years!

You are on the insignificant fringe of the growing public revolt with Mass Media and Governmental assault on the sensibilities of Citizens...
Click to expand...

I can't pass up Bud Wiser's post without responding.

If it were true that those of us who believe in freedom of expression are "on the insignificant fringe of the growing public revolt with Mass Media and Governmental assault on the sensibilities of Citizens" then it is unlikely that the television, radio, print, and web content that you hate so very, very much would be profitable. If it were true that the majority agreed with you, Howard Stern's show would have never been a profitable commodity. Nor video games like 'Manhunt' or saucy music videos on Mtv. What, you think that Hugh Hefner just built that giant mansion using contractors from some magical fantasy world where you don't have to pay them money?

Really?
:scrutiny:

Sorry, but the fact that you willingly cheer for the abrogation of other people's civil liberties is not only hateful and distasteful, but very shortsighted.

Yeah.
Keep cheering.

Right up until the day you get punished for saying something they don't like.
:barf:
 
Sorry - As a HAM radio operator I have to disagree with the free speech folks on this one . . .

The Electromagnetic Spectrum is not free public domain. When a person or station receives a license to operate, a contract is agreed to with our government. Part of that contract is the profanity restrictions. If a licensee breaks that portion (or any other portion) of the contract with the government, they can be sanctioned.
Click to expand...
JPM63US,
No one is arguing that the gov't doesn't fine people for violating their restrictions on speech when the words are broadcast, the argument being made is that such fines are wrong.
 
in congress this week the critters are entertaining the idea of increasing the fine for an obsentity violation from

$2700 per
to
$500,000 per
Click to expand...


Looks like they are trying to do their part to reduce the deficit.:rolleyes:
 
The funniest item in this entire thread is Stern saying we will soon be a religious state, when contemporary conventions, attitudes, and court decisions have determined just the opposite.

Does anyone really believe this? We grow more secular as I write these words.

To paraphrase C.S. Lewis, suggesting this country is under the influence of some religious-right trend would be like reaching for a fire-hose during a flood.

Stern has said a lot of dumb-??? stuff before, but this one takes the cake.
 
you know the FCC is a lot scarrier if you're a DJ on a non-profit Class D station like I am.

Recently a nearby class D found out it was getting kicked off the air to make way for a new station owned by media giant Radio one. They decided to move into the philadelphia market, so they kicked the 15watt class D station off the air because they wanted their frequency and the FCC allowed it despite the fact that the particular high school radio station is one of the oldest FM stations in the country and actually bought their licence from the inventor of FM for $1. Now the FCC is telling them to vacate to make room for another commercial hip hop station.

Also, anyone think that the director of the FCC may have got the job because his daddy put in a word for him?
 
I believe most of you are confusing vulgarities with free speech. Not the same thing. There are standards to be upheld -- minimum as they are -- and that's what the FCC is enforcing. Do like hearing about how a woman sucks c*ck on the radio? Live broadcasts of people having sex? Live broadcasts of castrating animals? (real example of Bubba's and Howard's shows) A "wardrobe malfunction" that results in what would be a crime if it was done intenationally on the street? Do you disagree with what the FCC did with the Superbowl halftime show?

So many of you complain about America society "circling the drain" because of poor moral choices, a lax moral atmosphere in this country. Then, when someone moves to do something about it -- in this case the federal government -- suddenly it's a plot to limit your right to have a contest to f*ck a porn star up the a** on commercial radio?

THINK ABOUT IT.
 
I believe most of you are confusing vulgarities with free speech. Not the same thing. There are standards to be upheld -- minimum as they are -- and that's what the FCC is enforcing.
Click to expand...
*sigh*
Okay, let's see. ACP, you say that "free speech" is really "Freedom to say what ACP is comfortable with". That about right?
Do like hearing about [...] [several examples of things ACP - and indeed Cordex - does not like to see on TV or hear on the radio]
Click to expand...
Not especially. But I don't like Jerry Springer or Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh or animal sex on Discovery or endless statist political babble on the various news-esque channels or holy rollin', pink haired, tear streaked, makeup encrusted uberreligious shows or little kids programs either. So I don't watch or listen to said programs.
So many of you complain about America society "circling the drain" because of poor moral choices, a lax moral atmosphere in this country.
Click to expand...
How can any moral choice I make be meaningful if it is made for me by my "betters"?
Then, when someone moves to do something about it -- in this case the federal government -- suddenly it's a plot to limit your right to [... reductio ad absurdum]
Click to expand...
I have no problem with Clear Channel choosing to limit their own free speech. I do have a problem with Fed.gov trying to take that role.
 
I believe most of you are confusing vulgarities with free speech. Not the same thing. There are standards to be upheld -- minimum as they are -- and that's what the FCC is enforcing.
Click to expand...

Actually, that is not correct. The FCC is "enforcing" a non-existent, subjective standard. Howard Stern hasn't been accused of broadcasting clearly defined vulgarities (for instance, "the 7 words you can't say"), but rather of violating a moving target of naughtiness that is not clearly defined under the law. The fact is, the FCC is a law unto itself, enforcing vauge, subjective "standards" on the basis of what it thinks is naughty, rather than any clearly defined law passed by congress, and essentially bullying broadcasters to prevent any legal challenges to their fines in the courts (take the FCC to court, the FCC puts you out of buisness before a verdict can even be reached).
 
But the FCC (and ACP, for that matter) "know it when they see it", right Sean?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned."
-Shepherd Book, Firefly
 
Cordex, I'm interested -- is there anything you believe doesn't deserve to be seen or uttered on the public airwaves? Or is absolutely everything and anything okay, just "turn the dial" if you're offended?
 
I never thought I'd see the day when the institution of marriage would be so denatured and decency so trivialized and relativized (I know I made the word up) that solid folks would come to the defense of "gay marriage" and of pigs like Howard Stern. I hope the FCC sends somebody to sodomize the bastard...
 
ACP,
Cordex, I'm interested -- is there anything you believe doesn't deserve to be seen or uttered on the public airwaves? Or is absolutely everything and anything okay, just "turn the dial" if you're offended?
Click to expand...
There's lots of stuff which I believe doesn't deserve to be displayed - publicly or privately. The difference between us is that I don't believe it is my job to hire armed goons to intimidate people into following my sense of decency. Which is nice, because I might not approve of some of the things you like, and vice versa. That's the beauty of freedom.
Turn the dial. Watch what your kids are watching. I don't know about you, but there are some programs on TV and radio that the FCC doesn't regulate, yet I certainly wouldn't want children watching. Do I lobby to have them taken off the air? Or do I just change the channel - or better yet, just turn off the TV - when appropriate?

Romulus,
I never thought I'd see the day when the institution of marriage would be so denatured and decency so trivialized and relativized (I know I made the word up) that solid folks would come to the defense of "gay marriage" and of pigs like Howard Stern. I hope the FCC sends somebody to sodomize the bastard...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. Wouldn't it be great if someone would just put a gun to everyone's head and made them believe just like Romulus?
Those liberal nutjobs who started this country should've formed a country with a state religion, state regulated speech and standards as to who we let live here.
 
Howard Stern is a bit more of a libertarian than most folkes realize.
Sure he likes to debase strippers and politicians on his show.
Thats his schtick.
He also talks frankly about racial relations and peoples right to be left alone.
His broadcast on 9-11 was the best radio on the air that day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Imus Affair: The Left Has Tasted Blood, Conservatives Warn
Replies
13
Views
642
Art Eatman
A
P
  • Locked
One American's View
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
CZ-75
C
C
  • Locked
California Ministry of Dissent Suppression
Replies
10
Views
910
CAC
C
D
  • Locked
Hollywood Republicans, Libertarians Coming Out Of The Closet
Replies
6
Views
2K
Diesle
D
H
  • Locked
No God, No Rights? You betcha.
2 3 4 5
Replies
107
Views
4K
MeekandMild
M
Back
Top