FCC WEIGHS INDECENCY CONDUCT IN LICENSE RENEWALS
Pressured by Congress to more-aggressively enforce indecency violations, FCC Chmn. Powell said the Commission would consider indecency violations when renewing a broadcaster’s license. “We will give serious consideration to designating for hearing renewal applications of licensees with serious or repeated indecency violations,” Powell said in a March 2 letter to House Commerce Committee ranking Democrat Dingell (Mich). The Committee voted overwhelmingly to raise FCC fines under the rewritten bill, called the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2004 (CD March 4 p1).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
In the past, the Commission generally didn’t consider indecency violations a disqualifying issue in license renewals. Powell noted that under the Communications Act of 1934, the FCC can’t take into consideration fines against a licensee before a final court decision, but the Commission may take notice of the underlying facts of a case in determining appropriate action. The bill would require the FCC to hold a license revocation hearing for a 3rd offense.
The FCC has “recently” been considering ways the Commission might apply more effectively the profanity standard on broadcast content, Powell said. In the past, the FCC has not issued a notice of apparent liability against a broadcaster for airing language that the Commission alleged was either obscene or profane. “Because it is easier to prove an indecency violation than an obscenity violation, the Commission proceeds under the indecency standard,” Powell said.
Powell also addressed concerns about the time it takes between an indecency compliant filing and FCC action. The indecency bill would create a 180-day time limit for the FCC to determine whether broadcasters have violated indecency statutes. Comr. Martin told reporters March 4 he would like to see indecency complaints resolved within 8 months. The FCC already dismissed a complaint this year because the statue of limitations had run out. The case involved Edmund Dinis of WJFD(FM) New Bedford, Mass., an FCC enforcement staffer said. In 2000, the FCC also dismissed a complaint because the FCC didn’t respond timely.
Powell said more than 2 dozen cases were in the final investigation stage and he anticipated “enforcement in all or most of these cases within the next few months.” This year, mainly because of the Super Bowl half-time show, the FCC has received 530,885 complaints involving 23 programs. In 2003, the Commission received 240,350 involving 318 programs; it denied or dismissed 368 and had 239,982 pending at year-end. In 2002, the FCC had 13,922 complaints involving 345 programs, dismissed 13,258 and had 664 pending at year-end.
The FCC has been more aggressive in the size of fines over the years. This year it has issued $789,500 in indecency fines against 3 broadcasters. Clear Channel paid its $755,000 fine in March. Emmis was slapped with a $7,000 fine, and Young Bcstg. $27,500. The FCC issued $440,000 in fines for inappropriate content in 2003, vs. 2002’s $99,400.
The FCC is taking steps to expedite indecency complaints, Powell said. It hasn’t been Commission practice to notify each complainant of a complaint’s receipt, because of the volume of complaints and FCC staffing constraints. However, the FCC’s Consumer & Government Affairs Bureau is exploring automatic notification through e-mail. “We hope that such a system may be in place within the next 12 months,” Powell said. The FCC also has begun consolidating complaints into one denial or dismissal order when it has many complaints about the same program. In response to e- mail complaints overloading FCC systems, the Commission on Feb. 25 installed a new service capable of handling higher volumes.