At last the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has decided to enforce the law. Its recent action is in response to public demands that have been escalating for several years.
In his last act before departing as FCC chairman, Mark Fowler joined in a unanimous Commission decision to crack down on what is called “raunch radio.” Ever since he was appointed to the office, Fowler had simply refused to enforce the laws against obscenity and indecency on our nation’s radio stations.
In its new announcement, the FCC clarified that it is unlawful to broadcast “language or material that depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs” when it is reasonably likely that children are in the audience.
The new FCC announcement was NOT a new rule. Broadcasting indecent material was already a criminal offense.
Section 1464 of the Criminal Code has long prohibited the broadcast of obscene or indecent material. The Communications Act of 1934 has long empowered the FCC to impose a range of civil sanctions when a violation occurs, including warnings, fines up to $2,000 per day, and revocation of licenses of broadcasters who violate the rules against indecency.
In a 1978 case called F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a 1975 FCC ruling against a broadcast of “seven dirty words” in a radio monologue. Under Mark Fowler’s chairmanship, the FCC presumably continued to prohibit those seven dirty words, but took no action on a torrent of other words that are just as dirty.
Chairman Fowler had a general attitude of letting the broadcasters do whatever they want. He looked the other way and ignored the obscenities. In essence, the FCC now says it will no longer limit its definition of indecent language to those particular seven words, but instead will apply a generic definition of indecency. The FCC announcement also reestablished access code methods to restrict minors’ access to dial-a-porn.
The FCC singled out three radio stations to make clear what kind of indecency is prohibited. The FCC asked the Justice Department to prosecute one Los Angeles station for obscene programming, and the FCC sent warning letters to one station in Philadelphia and to another station in Santa Barbara.
Much of the FCC discussion released to the public centered on the possibility of children being in the audience. In the past, the FCC had used 10 p.m. as the dividing line, after which it was assumed that children would not be in the audience. The FCC now admits that this time limit is not realistic; Arbitron rating figures show very little drop of audience among children after 10 p.m.
Because of massive misinformation among the American people, the FCC took pains to stress that its action is perfectly proper under the First Amendment because neither obscenity nor indecency is protected speech.
Brad Curl, the national director of Morality in Media and leader of a large coalition of anti-pornography groups, hailed the FCC announcement. Certainly it was a big victory for pro-family groups who have been working for this goal for years.
The outlook for future enforcement is good since the new FCC Chairman, Dennis Patrick, said the action “is a very significant step in the right direction,” correcting “an all-too-narrow definition” of indecency used in the past.
The disinformation propaganda distributed by the highly-paid propagandists for the porn peddlers immediately began circulating dire warnings, such as that the new rule might prohibit readings from Shakespeare and Mark Twain. Such false fears are raised in order to deceive listeners in cities other than Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Santa Barbara who do not know how raunchy “raunch radio” really is. I’ll spare the readers of this column any quotations from the sexually and anatomically graphic language that was aired on the three radio stations singled out by the FCC. Suffice it to say that one of the FCC Commissioners, not known as a prude, called it “disgustingly obscene.”
It is an insult to our intelligence to argue that the new FCC ruling might interfere with the free marketplace of ideas. We can all enjoy a full interchange of ideas, popular and unpopular, without having our ears assaulted by the handful of radio voices that are morbidly obsessed with sex organs, kooky sex, and excretory functions.
