FCC's Powell Not for Cable Indecency Rules

FCC's Powell Not for Cable Indecency Rules

Thursday, March 3, 2005



(03-03) 16:31 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --


Federal Communications Chairman Michael Powell said Thursday he does not support extending broadcast indecency guidelines to cable television and satellite TV and radio and said any efforts by Congress to do so would face legal scrutiny.


"I personally don't really support an extension," Powell said in an interview on Fox News Channel. "I think when the Congress takes a hard look at this, if they really study the constitutionality ... that it's difficult and unwise to extend it."


His remarks came several days after two congressional Republicans with influence over telecommunications issues indicated they would consider legislation to make cable and satellite stations adhere to indecency guidelines.


Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, head of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, said Tuesday he would push for such a measure in part because most viewers don't differentiate between traditional broadcasting and cable so they don't know when they might be exposed to objectionable programming.

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/03/03/national/w163110S70.DTL

"chattie." Oh PULEEEEEEEZE....

:scared:

enough to differentiate between a broadcast channel and a paid-for premium channel?

If there was a problem with the Family Fuck Fest being shown on basic cable, he might have some grounds, but I know I've never seen any such thing. Anything that might be objectionable is shown on premium channels only, and if you're paying extra for them, you should know what you are paying for.

I think people are perfectly able to distinguish between "traditional broadcasting" and cable because one is free and the other they have to pay for every month.

I'll just bet this dude watches some really sick porn in his spare time.

(And his father should be censored from all of our lives.)