Would Family-Friendly TV Fare Disappear Without the FCC ...

Patrick Trueman, president of Morality in Media,

thinks my column
mocking his demand that the Federal Communications Commission
protect his ?right to decency? was ?hysterical??and not in a good
way. Trueman argues that ?liberty simply does not, and cannot,
exist without moral restraint,? which in turn requires government
restraint on liberty, such as the FCC?s rules about the content of
broadcast programming. More liberty, in other words, requires less
liberty.

In case you don?t buy that counterintuitive claim, Trueman also
compares airing things that offend him to burglary. He says hearing
Cher curse on a music awards show or?catching a glimpse of
Charlotte Ross? butt on NYPD Blue?is like finding an
intruder ?standing in our living rooms when we get home, shouting
the f-word or taking their clothes off.? I perceive an important
distinction here that seems to elude Trueman: While the noisy or
naked stranger in the living room has violated someone?s property
rights by entering his home without permission, Cher and Charlotte
Ross appear only by invitation. That is, you will not hear or see
them unless you 1) buy a television set, 2) turn it on, and 3) tune
in to a particular program at a particular time. Neither
the?Billboard Music Awards?nor NYPD
Blue?is forcibly thrust upon anyone.

Because TV viewers can be offended by what they hear or see only
after they voluntarily assume that risk, the Supreme Court?s
invocation of ?the right to be left alone? in
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, the 1978 decision that upheld
the ban on broadcast indecency, never made much sense. It makes
even less sense now that people commonly face exactly the same risk
from other media (cable, satellite, Internet) that, according to
the Court, could not be subject to similar content regulation
without violating the First Amendment. Trueman offers no
justification for this puzzling constitutional distinction. Instead
he doubles down on the notion that the government is protecting our
?right to be left alone? when it punishes broadcasters for
?patently offensive? references to ?sexual or excretory activities
or

You can read the rest of this article at: http://reason.com/blog/2012/07/18/would-family-friendly-tv-fare-disappear

Short URL: http://www.txwclp.org/?p=13235

Posted by rbutler on Jul 19 2012. Filed under Libertarian News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

Source: http://www.txwclp.org/2012/07/would-family-friendly-tv-fare-disappear-without-the-fcc/

act of valor woody guthrie benson henderson 2012 dunk contest edgar vs henderson berkshire hathaway ufc 144