First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
PBS chief calls indecency rules unclear, 'paralyzing'

By The Associated Press

PASADENA, Calif. — Unclear federal rules for broadcast television decency standards are putting public TV stations at risk and threaten to deprive viewers of important programs, PBS President Paula Kerger said this week.

"The fines now would put stations out of business and we cannot allow that to happen," Kerger told a meeting of the Television Critics Association.

"We need to do a better job ... in letting the American people know that this is not just about Janet Jackson," she said on July 26. "This is about filmmakers that have powerful stories that now are not being allowed to tell those stories on public television or broadcast television."

Next week, PBS plans to file arguments in support of a Northern California public TV station that is appealing a $15,000 fine levied by the Federal Communications Commission over the airing of an episode of Martin Scorsese's music documentary "The Blues."

The program included interviews in which profanity was used and the FCC received a complaint from a viewer. The station, KCSM of San Mateo, is liable for the fine, not PBS, as is standard when fines are levied against broadcasters.

The federal benchmark for what is or isn't indecent is so vague that stations are put in danger of violating standards they don't realize exist, Kerger said.

"It's paralyzing," said Kerger, who has held the posts of president and chief executive officer for less than five months but has worked in public broadcasting for 13 years.

The FCC declined to comment on Kerger's remarks, said agency spokesman David Fiske.

Kerger noted the tenfold increase in federal fines per violation, from a maximum of $32,500 to as much as $325,000. The current furor over broadcast TV standards was fanned by the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show on CBS in which pop singer Jackson's breast was exposed during a song.

John F. Wilson, a fellow PBS executive, gave a vivid example of broadcasting's quandary: Scenes in which a character utters an epithet may be censored not only for sound but for picture, he said.

"We try to follow the zig or the zag here of the FCC ... we are now blurring lips when you can see plainly, to a reasonable person making this judgment, that you can tell what they're saying," Wilson said.

That action is being taken on the advice of PBS' lawyers, not at the direction of the FCC, "but we're taking that route."

Kerger called the visual alteration "just outrageous, when you think about it."

She's met with FCC commissioners in the past few weeks to discuss the decency issue and impress on them that "we are not talking about doing sensationalist work, we are not talking about doing salacious work, we are just trying to do good work."

She said she also hoped to get guidance she could relay to member stations about "what is appropriate and what is not appropriate" in the evening hours before 10 p.m. and what might be subject to fines, she said.

"I can't tell you, as I stand here today, that I still have a clear understanding," she said.

PBS is wary of what might befall an upcoming documentary on World War II by acclaimed filmmaker Ken Burns. "The War" is scheduled to air in fall of 2007.

Those sharing their memories for such a film should be able to do so freely, even if FCC-banned epithets are involved, Kerger said. One suggested solution is to put "The War" on later at night, she said, but that would deprive some of the chance to see what Burns feels is his greatest work.

For now, the film is scheduled to air between 8 and 10 p.m., although the air date has yet to be announced. Alerting concerned viewers to its language content should be considered an adequate safeguard, Kerger said.

"They should have the opportunity not to watch something if it's going to be troubling," she said. "But for others, to be able to see a documentary and to be able to let a person tell their own story and not censor the words that are coming out of their mouth is tremendously important."


Battling TV indecency is latest rage; is censorship next?

Public may be looking for more choices — that would include cleaner fare — rather than more regulation. 04.28.05

House blocks proposed cut in public broadcasting funds
But PBS still could end up with smaller budget as other subsidies are eliminated. 06.24.05

TV networks, stations challenge FCC indecency ruling
Broadcasters call federal enforcement of rules on profane language vague, inconsistent. 04.17.06

Bush signs broadcast-decency law
Large increase in fines will force broadcasters to 'take seriously their duty to keep the public airwaves free of obscene, profane and indecent material,' president says. 06.16.06

CBS asks 3rd Circuit to overturn Super Bowl fine
Network argues $550,000 penalty for Janet Jackson's 2004 breast-baring performance is 'unconstitutional, contrary to the Communications Act and FCC rules and generally arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law.' 07.31.06

FCC wants to reconsider indecency ruling
Attorney asks 2nd Circuit to delay hearing broadcasters' lawsuit so that agency can review its finding that 'NYPD Blue,' three other TV shows violated indecency rules. 08.30.06

Some stations hesitate to air 9/11 documentary
CBS affiliates wary of possible fines over firefighters' foul language as decency group vows to flood FCC with complaints. 09.05.06

2nd Circuit halts enforcement of tougher FCC indecency rules
Court also grants commission's request for additional two months to review its finding that 'NYPD Blue,' three other TV shows violated indecency guidelines. 09.08.06

FCC drops 2, keeps 2 obscenity charges against TV shows
Fox spokesman says decision 'highlights our concern about the government's inability to issue consistent, reasoned decisions in highly sensitive First Amendment cases.' 11.07.06

2nd Circuit takes up broadcast-indecency case
Broadcasters are to argue today that the FCC has instituted new, inconsistent and unconstitutional rules on use of profanity. 12.20.06

Appeals judges grill FCC lawyer over profanity rules
Government attorney surprised some when he said news programs could broadcast yesterday's profanity-laced hearing without penalty. 12.21.06

2nd Circuit: FCC's policy on accidental expletives is arbitrary
Court sides with Fox TV's challenge, says agency's policy might not survive First Amendment scrutiny. 06.05.07

3rd Circuit to study 'wardrobe malfunction'
Panel to decide whether 2004 Super Bowl halftime incident was indecent or fleeting, accidental glitch that shouldn't be punished. 09.11.07

FCC to TV viewers: Watch what we say
By Paul K. McMasters Pressure for more-aggressive regulation of broadcast indecency raises significant First Amendment concerns for viewers as well as creators of TV programming. 04.09.06

News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.

print this   Print

Last system update: Friday, July 25, 2008 | 07:59:37
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment

First Reports
Supreme Court
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Freedom Sings™
First Amendment

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment

Lesson plans
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links