Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, June 12, 2009
Brent Bozell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Will the FCC Press Hollywood?
by Brent Bozell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


A read of that Obama campaign page is not encouraging: "Obama values our First Amendment freedoms and our right to artistic expression and does not view regulation as the answer to these concerns. An Obama administration will give parents the tools and information they need to control what their children see on television and the Internet in ways fully consistent with the First Amendment."

That sounds almost exactly like the broadcasters and the cable industry, who want to put all the responsibility and all of the blame for sleazy TV on parents who haven't utilized all the supposed "tools" that have been put in their hands to monitor and block the gunk that Hollywood makes.

Sen. Obama spoke out at a Kaiser Foundation forum on Nov. 9, 2005, asking, "What do we do when bad television becomes the enemy of good parenting?" He spoke for most Americans when he said, "You can talk to the most liberal Democratic parent and First Amendment absolutist, and they will still cringe when they see some of the programming that's on television today."

If Obama is as smart as the adoring media constantly says he is, then he knows full well that the current V-chip and the self-selected content ratings used to block programming have been proven to be wildly inaccurate and ineffective.

The closest Obama came to frustrating the TV programmers in this Kaiser address was insisting that the cable companies could develop technology to "make it possible for parents to create their own family tier just by programming their television (to block entire channels, or genres of channels) ... There's no reason the industry can't make it as easy to find family-friendly television as it is to program TiVo. But if the industry fails to act -- if it fails to give parents advanced controls and new choices -- Congress will."

Congress did act in 2006 to pass the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, which increased the maximum fine for indecency tenfold. That wasn't a technological fix, but a bigger hammer for the FCC -- if, and only if, it decided to enforce indecency violations. We don't know whether Obama favored it, since it cleared the Senate without a roll-call vote, but it passed the House by a whopping 379 to 35, so one might expect a senator aspiring to be president would have voted Yes.

Senators need to ask Mr. Genachowski if he will genuinely and publicly pressure broadcasters and cable chieftains to shape up, since even Obama knows almost everyone is disgusted to sit in front of the TV with their children? Will he at least give the public the ability to stop funding wretched channels if they want? And will he enforce indecency with fines -- as he has been mandated by law to do -- or remove all the watchdog's teeth and let it sleep on the porch?

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Founder and President of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell runs the largest media watchdog organization in America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Brent Bozell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Demand Affirmative Action NOW!!!
Sotomayor and Affirmative Action??
Sotomayor and Affirmative Action??

Affirmative Action is A Biased Philosophy. Why should Special Treatment Only Go To People of Color? I think that we whites should demand Affirmative Action too.

It does not matter if you are a person of color and do not qualify to attend a prestigeous university. Affirmative Action said, "to hell with test scores, ability, and intelligence, you have to admit certain students based on gender or race, and after you are forced to accept them, you have to insure that they give the appearance of succeeding by passing them on and graduating them whether or not they could complete the course work." We now have many doctors, lawyers, Especially Politicians, teachers, nurses, and others who are incompetent, but licensed and have prestigeous credentials on their walls that they did not earn, because they were incapable of earning them." Affirmative action has put many incompetents in positions of power, and this is very dangerous.

Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's pick for the Supreme Court of the U.S. was on TV this week bragging about the fact they she got a Yale Law Degree and Undergraduate Degree without having the requisite intelligence and the accompanying test scores, thanks to Affirmative Action. And she said this with Pride.

With Reverse Affirmative Action, I should be Guaranteed a Spot on the LA Laker Team, complete with Multi-Million dollar salary, even though I am only 5 foot 10, I am white, and I cannot Jump, Cannot Shoot, but hey, what does ability, talent and skills have to do with it?

Afterall, the Average White Guy is the most discriminated against group in our society today. Maybe, we will take my case to the Supreme Court, and see how a Wise, Clumsy, Latino, Lesbian broad will rule?? I know an Intelligent White Guy would likely rule in my favor, if he is upholding the Letter of the Law of Affirmative Action, which Says, Ability and Qualification Does Not Matter.

expression??
Expression is not covered under the first amendment. Again the first is to keep the FEDERAL government from depriving us of the ability to communicate with one another through the written word and speech.
This does not mean in any way that states and thus localities are not allowed to have decency standards. At the time of the US constitution's ratification most states actually had language in their constitutions expressing that virtue was to be a goal of the government.
Expression, such as a lewd t-shirt, or public displays of obscenity is not communication. Communication is two parties willingly interacting, thus speech and press. One does not have a choice when others display or "express" their messages in public settings.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.