Any effort to extend indecency regulation to cable or other nonbr...
Any effort to extend indecency regulation to cable or other nonbroadcast media would fail a constitutional challenge, First Amendment attorney Robert Corn-Revere said in a new paper released by the Progress & Freedom Foundation. Corn-Revere dismissed the argument that…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
as cable programming becomes more popular, it gains the pervasiveness that FCC v. Pacifica case used to justify broadcast regulation. In Pacifica, the court focused not on whether most people watched TV and listen to radio, but on whether they could control their access to programming in advance, Corn-Revere said. With technologies such as the V-chip and set-top box lock, he said, parents have more control over programming. He said legislators, recognizing First Amendment challenges to direct content regulation of cable and satellite programming, prefer regulation of business practices, such as pushing for family friendly tiers or a la carte service.