FCC Should Reform Complaint Process, Broadcasters Say
The FCC should reform the way it receives and processes indecency complaints, said several broadcasters, associations and other groups in replies to the commission’s public notice on proposed changes to its indecency policy and in follow-up interviews. Using a “community standard” for indecency is “inherently unreliable” when organizations “can send out an e-blast resulting in several thousand of its base submitting an electronic complaint to the FCC,” said the Writers Guild of America. A group that encourages members to file indecency complaints said otherwise. Every indecency complaint “comes from the affirmative action and efforts of an individual American citizen who enjoys full ownership of the broadcast airwaves and thus has a right to a say in how they are used,” said the Parents Television Council (PTC).
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.
Several broadcasters said indecency complaints should be required to include evidence that the complainant personally watched the violation occur. The FCC should “proceed with enforcement inquiries” only on complaints based on firsthand knowledge and “supporting documentation,” said NAB. Currently, while complainants may provide evidence, they aren’t required to, according to the FCC’s website. Complaint filers should have to “attest” that they “lodged the complaint upon a considered decision to do so, rather than at the prompting of a third party,” said the ABC Television Affiliates Association. “Are we really saying people should have to record [indecency violations] and send them to the FCC?” asked PTC Policy Director Dan Isset. “It’s [the FCC’s] job to investigate violations.” He also said the PTC website, which contains links to help visitors file indecency complaints, also contains video clips of the violations it highlights.
"There’s never been a time in history when it was easier for people to record violations,” said Pillsbury broadcast attorney Scott Flick, referring to the pervasiveness of smartphones and apps that can record video. However, he said it would be difficult for the commission to make submitting complaints more difficult. The likelihood of the commission requiring recordings or evidence for indecency complaint submissions is “zero,” said Drinker Biddle broadcast attorney Howard Liberman. He said increasing the difficulty of the submission process would be politically unpopular for the commission.
Along with the process for submitting complaints, the commission should change the way it reacts to them, said several broadcasters and associations. American Public Media and others said the FCC should change its policy of putting a hold on station renewals over indecency violations, and set deadlines to address them. The filing referenced the renewal application of Minnesota Public Radio station KNOW-FM in Minneapolis-St. Paul, which was put on hold because of a listener complaint that confused the word “flunk” for “fuck,” said APM. “The KNOW license has now been in limbo for three years due to the misinterpretation/hypersensitivity of a listener, the backlog at the Commission, and the Commission’s inability and failure to quickly dispense with such Complaints."
Some broadcast attorneys think the current political climate could mean changes to the commission’s indecency policy and complaint process are possible. “I don’t sense there is the pressure from the Hill now that the commission should be cracking down on the media,” said Liberman, contrasting the current commission to the agency under former Chairman Kevin Martin. “This shows signs of being more than perfunctory,” said Flick of the commission’s look at its indecency rules. Any movement on the rules will wait until a full commission is seated, and because of the importance of proceedings like the incentive auction, maybe even longer, said Flick. “It’s always possible that nothing happens if something is politically controversial.”