Look out Howard! The FCC Wants to Regulate Cable and Satellite

Look out Howard Stern! It’s becoming more and more possible that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will regulate cable and satellite broadcasts.

Stern plans to move his sexually-explicit radio show from public airwaves to private satellite radio in 2006. But if private broadcast companies don’t make some changes, the FCC may standardize them as well.

Current law prohibits network television stations and non-satellite radio stations from airing references to sexual or excretory activities or organs between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when children are more likely to be listening and watching.

But the FCC has no control over cable and satellite stations -- at least, not yet.

A new FCC chair

On March 16, 2005, President Bush named Kevin Martin chairman of the FCC. Martin is in favor of regulating cable and satellite stations, whereas his predecessor, Michael Powell, was not.

Powell, the son of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, resigned after four years as head of the agency. Powell led the charge against broadcast indecency, but was also known for being pro-business.

Martin, on the other hand, is likely to be less friendly to the cable and satellite industries. He’s already threatened to regulate them if they don’t offer more "family friendly" channel packages as he has suggested.

Bush was able to avoid a possibly contentious nomination process by choosing Martin, who is already a sitting commissioner of the FCC. Martin’s replacement, however, will need to be confirmed by the Senate. Until the Senate agrees to a new commissioner, the commission will be made up of two Democrats and two Republicans.

The debate - regulating the private

Those in favor of regulation say that children have as much access to cable and satellite networks as they do public or "free" networks.

But opponents say that regulation is unfair because subscribers have chosen to pay for the service. Therefore, they make the conscious and continuous decision to allow the programming into their households.

Several lawmakers would back greater regulation. For example, Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska wants cable companies to self-regulate by offering subscribers the option to block channels or programs that they find offensive. But if the cable and satellite industries won’t do it themselves, Stevens says, Congress should act.

Senators John Rockefeller IV (D- West Virginia) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R- Texas) have already introduced a bill that would give the FCC power to patrol cable and satellite broadcasts.

The bill would expand FCC authority to another new territory as well - violence. Currently, the FCC does not dole out fines for excessive violence, though lawmakers have been fighting to control it for years. Since 1993, Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) has introduced and reintroduced a bill that would direct the FCC to study violence safeguards and create a family hour in which violence is banned. Although Hollings has introduced the bill five times, it has never passed in Congress.

The debate - who decides what’s decent?

From a parent’s point of view, it is getting increasingly difficult to police against “inappropriate" material. Among radio, television, and the Internet, parents have trouble keeping up, even with the long list of censoring gadgetry available.

But networks argue that the law is vague, and indeed it raises many questions: Are all references to sexual activity equally transgressive, or are some acts more offensive than others? Is there a scale to weigh offenses, and do the more offensive acts get the highest fines? If there are greater and lesser offenses, are bodies more offensive than language? And perhaps most importantly, who decides?

And what about the First Amendment right to freedom of speech? If you can’t say it on cable, where can you say it? Is it fair to censor certain ideas, acts, thoughts, and words from all media, in the name of protecting our children?

What do you think?

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don’t want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue. To log onto one of our online forums, click here.

WomenMatter encourages women to educate themselves on the issues and then approach their representatives with ideas.

Even though the election is over, your voice is vital. Make sure your leaders know what’s important to you. To see how your representatives vote and to contact them, click here.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We launch after school GirlsMatter Clubs in middle and high schools to grow the next generation of politically aware women through a full curriculum and startup kit on girlsmatter.com.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.
• We provide partnerships with nonpartisan organizations that provide services to women and advocate for them.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women’s lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.

Update Posted on: 3/28/2005