WHITE HOUSE BEHIND EFFORTS TO RAISE INDECENCY FINES

An effort to raise FCC fines for indecent broadcasts gained momentum Wed. when the Administration said it would support a House bill that would raise the maximum fines the FCC could levy against a broadcaster. House Telecom Subcommittee Chmn. Upton (R-Mich.) said the bill (HR-3717) was on a “fast track.” The House Telecom Subcommittee examined Wed. ways to curtail indecency on broadcast networks. The FCC told the panel that the Commission was increasing enforcement against broadcasters who carried indecent material. But members pondered other methods that might curtail indecent content, including license revocations and industry self-policing.

The Administration suggested ways to strengthen HR-3717 that would increase maximum FCC fines for indecent broadcasts tenfold to $275,000 for each utterance and the maximum fine against a station to $3 million. In a letter from Commerce Secy. Donald Evans dated Jan. 28, the Administration suggested adding language in the bill that would require consideration of the maximum penalty for indecency broadcast during a children’s program (as defined by the FCC’s Children’s Programming Policy) or during a show that carried a rating appropriate for children. “While it is not the role of government to dictate the content of broadcast programming, existing laws are meant to protect families and children from being inundated with obscene and indecent broadcasts,” the letter said.

FCC Enforcement Bureau Chief David Solomon said Chmn. Powell supported efforts to raise fines. He said the Commission had taken several steps recently to step up enforcement: (1) The agency in Powell’s term had issued more indecency forfeitures ($1.4 million) than the total during the 7 years of the prior 2 chairmen. (2) The FCC began recommending the current maximum fine of $27,500 for many cases. (3) The FCC last year began warning violators that license revocation proceedings could begin for serious repeated violations. (4) The Commission notified broadcasters that it might treat multiple utterances of indecent content as multiple violations. Solomon said if the FCC voted to levy fines in the complaint against NBC stations for airing rock singer Bono’s profanity during the Golden Globe award telecast, it would be another increase in its enforcement.

The hearing provided opportunities for nearly every member who attended to criticize what they perceived as declining standards of broadcasting. The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau ruled that Bono’s profanity wasn’t indecent because it was used as an adjective, which Powell has said the full Commission would review and he would like to see overturned. House Commerce Committee Chmn. Tauzin (R-La.) said the FCC’s original ruling was “splitting hairs.” He praised Fox -- which also had been getting criticism for airing a profanity on other awards show -- for announcing the network would put award shows on a 5-sec. delay. “Broadcasters can and should use a broadcast delay for certain live shows when mischief is most likely to happen,” he said.

Other members also thought the industry could do more to police itself. Several said that broadcasters should adopt some form of “code of conduct,” although some wondered how effective the industry would be at policing itself. Rep. Walden (R-Ore.) said the industry should develop its own standards for decency enforcement. Rep. Green (D-Tex.) said the NAB had developed such a uniform standard, but it was struck down by the Justice Dept. (DoJ) on antitrust grounds. William Wertz, exec. vp, Fairfield Bcstg., said he hoped NAB would be allowed to establish new guidelines.

Several members said the FCC more often should brandish the threat of license revocations. Solomon said the FCC never had begun license revocation hearings based on indecent content complaints. Upton suggested a “3 strikes and your off” the air policy for the FCC. When he noted that many broadcasters, particularly on radio, had a history of repeat offenses, Solomon said the FCC was “looking at revocation as a potential remedy.”

Parents TV Council Pres. Brent Bozell said he would release documentation soon on the FCC’s lack of action on indecency in a report to be titled “Dereliction of Duty.” He said the Commission had moved too slowly on several complaints and even suggested it was blocking complaint e- mails as a means of potentially avoiding action. (Solomon said it probably was a technical issue that could be resolved.) Bozell supported HR-3717, but suggested the fines could be even higher because $275,000 won’t necessarily deter multibillion-dollar corporations.

First Amendment attorney Robert Corn-Revere said the govt. should be careful in setting guidelines based on worst- case examples. He cited situations where news or political speech could fall under those guidelines. Corn-Revere also questioned the use of a community standard to define indecency. He asked were some of the worst shows are the highest-rated ones, “what does that say about community standards?”

Several members also used the hearing to air their concerns about media consolidation. House Telecom Subcommittee ranking Democrat Markey (Mass.) said the FCC’s looser media ownership limits could make the bill less effective since companies were likely to grow in size and revenue, making the fines even less significant. Rep. Stupak (D-Mich.) also raised concerns about CBS, which has said it wouldn’t run an ad during the Super Bowl from Moveon.org that was critical of President Bush. Sen. Durban (D-Ill.) told the Senate Tues. that that was “Exhibit A” on the effects of media consolidation. He suggested the decision was spurred by the recently enacted 39% broadcast ownership cap, which spared Viacom (CBS’s owner) from having to divest some of its owned-and-operated CBS stations.

Commerce Committee ranking Democrat Dingell (Mich.) said the hearing would be more helpful if network executives and FCC comrs. had attended. Several of the FCC commissioners were in San Antonio Wed. for a hearing on broadcast localism. Upton said it was likely that more hearings on the topic would be held before the bill was marked up. Dingell also sent detailed letters to the heads of the 4 major networks seeking information about their policies on indecent content.

Rep. Bilirakis (R-Fla.) said if local affiliates were fined for their networks’ actions, then they should have more rights in declining network content. A few members also questioned cable TV’s role in indecency. Rep. Terry (R-Neb.) suggested broadcasters were in a “race to the bottom” with cable providers. And while cable providers may not have the legal standards for decency that broadcasters do, they still could be subject to community standards. Walden echoed that: “Broadcasters cover the first 6 channels, what about the other 400? In some ways, broadcasters are the most regulated and respectful” TV stations.