First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
Broadcasters to consider code of conduct

By The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Broadcasters meeting yesterday to discuss indecency said they would consider an industry code of conduct, an idea the nation’s chief telecommunications regulator suggested they should pursue.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell said if the industry left it to the government to set strict standards for broadcast decency, they wouldn’t like the result.

“You do not want to ask the government to write a ‘Red Book’ of dos and don’ts,” Powell told the gathering organized by the National Association of Broadcasters. “I understand the complaint about knowing where the line is, but heavier government entanglement through a ‘dirty conduct code’ will not only chill speech, it may deep-freeze it. It might be an ice age that would last a very long time.”

NAB President Eddie O. Fritts Jr. said a code was mentioned by most speakers at the daylong seminar, and would be seriously considered. He said the discussion would continue at the NAB’s annual meeting later this month.

The closed-door session attracted 350 broadcasters, many of them owners of just a few television or radio stations. The four major networks — CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox — are not members of the association, though executives of ABC and Fox did speak at lunch.

Viacom Inc., which owns CBS as well as the Infinity Broadcasting radio chain, employs controversial radio host Howard Stern. The FCC recently proposed fining Infinity $27,500 for a Stern show, and Clear Channel Communications, the nation’s largest radio chain, suspended him from its six stations that carry the program.

“A lot of broadcasters had never approached the line,” Fritts said. “The issue was what about those who have and what have they wrought in the industry.”

Philip Lombardo, chairman of Citadel Communications Ltd., which owns television stations in Illinois, Iowa and Nebraska, said most broadcasters already stayed far below any indecency line and would not be curtailed by any code.

“Most broadcasters currently operate within a code,” Lombardo said. “They understand what is the proper programming and the proper response for their community.”

The original code was dropped in 1982 under Reagan administration pressure, on both antitrust and First Amendment grounds.

Commissioner Michael Copps joined Powell in urging the broadcasters to reinstate it.

“I believe the industry could come together and craft a new code, perfectly able to pass court muster, and one that would serve the needs of businesses as well as those of concerned families,” Copps said.

The NAB scheduled its first-ever Summit on Responsible Programming in response to proposed legislation raising the maximum fine for indecency from $27,500 to $500,000. The broadcasters also were responding to public outrage over the now-infamous Feb. 1 Super Bowl halftime show, which ended with singer Justin Timberline exposing Janet Jackson’s right breast to millions of TV viewers. The incident generated more than 500,000 complaints.

Fritts said the issue would be around for a while. “It’s not going to be something that is going to be resolved in 30 days,” he said.

Others fear that efforts to curb indecency will run afoul of the First Amendment.

As Powell appeared earlier yesterday at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., decried what he called an “assault on freedom of speech.”

“I think people should have the ability to say what they please and I have the ability not to listen to them,” Serrano said.


House votes to raise fines for indecent programming

ACLU criticizes move, saying that freedom of speech could be impinged as broadcasters try to follow vague definition of what is indecent. 03.12.04

FCC to broadcasters: F-word out of bounds
Agency overrules its staff, declares that expletive uttered by rock star Bono on NBC last year was both indecent and profane. 03.19.04

Anti-indecency efforts prompt broadcast changes
Clear Channel drops Howard Stern after FCC fines company $495,000; meanwhile, some critics say media are not standing up for First Amendment. 04.09.04

FCC head opposes strict sanctions for indecency violators
'I don't think you should reduce something as facile and vague as indecency to clear cause-and-effect consequences,' Michael Powell tells broadcasters conference. 04.21.04

A closer look at broadcast indecency
Examining what it is, what government regulators, broadcasters are doing about it. 03.23.04

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

print this   Print

Last system update: Thursday, August 21, 2008 | 18:15:08
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