Center for Creative Voices in Media Blog

Distinguished Ex-FCCers Pan Commission's 'Victorian Crusade'

A bipartisan who's who of former FCC Chairs and officials tell the Supreme Court to overturn the Commission's indecency policy as unconstitutional.

Former FCC Chairs Slam Commission's 'Victorian Crusade' - Broadcasting & Cable.

CV Files Brief with Supreme Court in FOX v FCC

Creative Voices filed its brief with the Supreme Court in Fox v FCC, the case where the Commission found that fleeting epithets by Bono, Cher, and Nicole Ritchie uttered on live television were "indecent."  Last year, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with us, ruling that the Commission's decision violated the First Amendment.  The Supreme Court now has the case and will likely hear oral argument in January.  A copy of our brief is available here:  Center for Creative Voices in Media: News.

Janet Jackson Fine Overturned -- Again!

The eternal battle over Janet Jackson's 2004 Super Bowl "wardrobe malfunction," now in its 8th year(!), continues, with the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling for the second time that the FCC's decision to fine CBS for "indecency" was "arbitrary and capricious."  The ball is now in the FCC's court on whether to appeal to SCOTUS or reconsider its decision.  Center for Creative Voices in Media: News.

See You in SCOTUS

The Dept. of Justice appealed the Second Circuit's decision that the FCC's indecency regulations are unconstitutional to the Supreme Court. Creative Voices is a party in those cases and we look forward to participating.  WSJ report here.

FCC Fines of NYPD Blue Held Unconstitutional

We win again. The FCC's fines against NYPD Blue were found unconstitutional by the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals, based on its recent decision in Fox v. FCC. The Court agreed with CV, an amicus curiae in the case, that the Commission's arbitrary and capricious indecency policy put creative, challenging, controversial, non-homogenized broadcast television programming at risk.

The Court's decision is here. Our discussion of the case and its principles are at Center for Creative Voices in Media: News.

FCC Indecency Policy Unconstitutional, Court Rules

CV applauds the ruling of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Fox v FCC that the FCC policy on broadcast indecency is unconstitutional and harms not only creative media artists, but the American public. In its well-reasoned decision, the Court cited several examples found in CV's Big Chill white paper of the "chilling effect" of the FCC's actions. We fully expect the Supreme Court to uphold this decision should the FCC choose to appeal it. The history of the case, our filings, and earlier commentary can be found here.

Creative Voices Discusses Supreme Court Indecency Decision

Jonathan Rintels, Executive Director of Creative Voices, discusses the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Federal Communications Commission's fining of Fox Television for airing Cher and Nicole Richie's "fleeting expletives" at the 2004 American Music Awards on Charlottesville Now, WINA-AM, on May 6, 2009, here.

Supreme Court Hears Fox Profanity Case

Alas, the Supreme Court skedded our indecency case on, wouldn't you know it, Election Day. Choosing between Voter Protection in Virginia and the Supremes, we chose Voter Protection and thus can't give our own eyewitness report on the oral argument. But John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable writes that, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia raised some tough questions about whether the FCC had really changed its policy, and whether, in fact, it had sufficiently justified that policy. When Fox argued that society had become more tolerant of language in the 30 years since the Pacifica decision on broadcast profanities, Scalia asked whether the network might have had something to do with that. "Justice Ginsburg appeared to be squarely in our camp," said the representative. "Scalia, probably on the other side." Ginsburg said there was no "ryhme or reason" behind the FCC finding swearing in a documentary about the blues indecent, but not finding it indecent in WWII film Saving Private Ryan. 

We hear the Supremes were more comfortable avoiding the large Constitutional First Amendment questions that the networks raised about ANY government regulation of broadcast content and were looking to the more narrow question of whether the FCC had been "arbitrary and capricious," as the Second Circuit had found, in its suddenly sweeping expansion of indecency regulation that had been narrow and restrained for decades. Our expert SCOTUS handicapper predicts it'll be a 5-4 decision, one way or the other. Supreme Court Hears Fox Profanity Case - 11/4/2008 12:11:00 PM - Broadcasting & Cable.

Leahy Lays Into FCC Over Indecency Enforcement

Kudos to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) for remarks last night at The Media Institute: "The media should be...bringing vibrant and interesting voices and views into our homes,' not worrying that "an inadvertent slip is going to land them in trouble with regulators." Leahy said that while he does not want 'TV screens and radio shows filled with offensive and innapropriate words and images," he also said he had discovered that "there is an on/off switch," and suggested that was an important content contol technology. He also put in a plug for the V-chip/ratings system. The senator said he believed "Strongly" that it was the role of parents, not government regulators, "to determine what is appropriate for children to see and hear." "Good lord, where are we in this country," Leahy said after recounting the story of NBC affiliates afraid to show an episode of ER about breast cancer because they feared a brief depiction of a woman's breast would get them in trouble with the FCC. Leahy Lays Into FCC Over Indecency Enforcement - Broadcasting & Cable.

PTC Uses Kids as Human Shields

Josef Adalian in Television Week does a wonderful job of calling out the Parents Television Council. Couldn't be timelier, with the Supreme Court about to hear the crucial Fox v. FCC case, a case ginned up by the PTC banging on its email lists to flood the FCC with comments, most from people who never saw the show they were complaining about.

Unfortunately, the PTC’s actions and words too often have indicated that its real mission includes pushing for government-sanctioned censorship of the media and the elimination of any and all programming that conflicts with its far-right social and political philosophies. ... The PTC doesn’t want to make TV safe for kids. It wants to make it safe only for those shows that fit into its narrowly constructed worldview of what constitutes acceptable TV. And when it identifies programming that doesn’t mesh with its agenda, the PTC goes into overdrive whipping up its base to take action. “All they’re about is fund raising and court cases,” said one network executive who, like everyone interviewed for this column, spoke only on the condition of anonymity. “They would rather curse the darkness than light a candle.” Adalian Column: PTC Uses Kids as Human Shields - TVWeek - News.