|
<blockquote>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government issued formal indecency guidelines for radio and TV broadcasters Friday, seven years after announcing its intent to do so and 27 years after the Supreme Court allowed limits on indecent material.
The Federal Communications Commission policy statement offers no radical departures from existing practice but simply spells out the agency's enforcement criteria, satisfying a 1994 agreement to help broadcasters determine what constitutes indecency.
The guidelines go beyond the list of ``seven dirty words'' made famous by comedian George Carlin -- never a basis for FCC policy -- to emphasize that context and tone are important factors in determining whether a broadcast is indecent or not.
FCC spokesman David Fiske said the guidelines are meant to provide a fleshed-out legal summary of previous indecency decisions.
``It's case law. This isn't a checklist,'' Fiske said.
Offensive descriptions of sexual or excretory acts have no place on the public airwaves, according to the FCC, which provides many examples of both decent and indecent material.
Foul language itself, such as spontaneous cursing by newscasters or an expletive-laden tirade from convicted Mafia boss John Gotti, is not indecent if it is unintentional or part of a bona-fide news story, the commission said.
The Holocaust movie ``Schindler's List,'' which depicts full nudity, and an ``Oprah'' TV show featuring explicit discussion of sexual relationships were also given the green light, as both were determined to serve a legitimate purpose.
Radio ``shock jock'' programs such as the ``Howard Stern Show'' and ``Bubba the Love Sponge,'' with their repetitive, explicit description of sex acts, were held up as examples of indecency.
Material that relies primarily on innuendo could be found indecent as well, the commission said, if its intent is unmistakable.
Programs broadcast between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. are given greater latitude, as children are less likely to be listening at those hours.
Commissioner Gloria Tristani issued a dissenting statement, saying the agency should focus more on enforcement rather than issuing guidelines that could encourage more abuse.
``This policy statement will likely become instead a 'how-to' manual for those licensees who wish to tread the line drawn by our cases,'' she said.
Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth voted to approve the report, but said the need for content restrictions may fade as the media landscape diversifies.
``As alternative sources of programming and distribution increase, broadcast content restrictions must be eliminated,'' he said.
Both Tristani and Furchtgott-Roth criticized the agency for taking seven years to issue the statement, a process that should have taken nine months according to the terms of the 1994 agreement.
Fiske said he did not know why the agency took so long.
The Supreme Court said in 1974 that the FCC has the right to regulate offensive speech on radio and television, due to the ``uniquely pervasive presence'' of the medium.
Obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment, is not permitted on broadcasts.</blockquote>
|