This week we have been considering “fleeting indecency” and the extent to which the Constitution allows the government to regulate broadcast media.   Today in the Community we ask for your thoughts on how FCC v. Fox should (as opposed to will) be decided.

As always, we hope you will participate. Comments from yesterday follow the jump.

Matthew Holohan – 2 Promoted Comments

Government restriction of free speech is always an important First Amendment issue, regardless of the form it takes. Whether it’s fleeting indecency or a high school student holding a “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” sign, the public should be concerned when the force of government is used to stifle speech in any way.

Reply

Bradley Smith – 3 Promoted Comments

This issue is exceptionally important, and one that deserves consideration given the huge changes that have occurred in mass media since George Carlin and FCC v. Pacifica.

While the case does not involve the hot button political discourse that was the topic of Snyder v. Phelps, it is important to address any policy that stifles speech, especially in the broad manner of the FCC’s “fleeting indecency” policy.

Given the prevalence of the internet in society today, it seems odd to restrict speech on the television given its “pervasive nature” while the internet is unrestricted. The case here gives the Court the chance to address this discrepancy, and for that reason it is certainly an important First Amendment issue.

Reply

Posted in Community

Recommended Citation: Kali Borkoski, Today in the Community: January 13, 2012, SCOTUSblog (Jan. 13, 2012, 9:47 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/01/today-in-the-community-january-13-2012/